Check out their website. The results look okay. I guess they were just checking the safety of the treatment as their primary objective. Nothing spectacular but it beats what options we have at the moment.
Base on the phase I and phase I alone, it works but won't give you full head of hair.
That's not saying subtle manipulations of dosage and/or repeated injections won't improve results
05-02-2012 06:27 AM
BoSox
It works, but leave it to people on this forum to shit all over it. I'm sure there will be plenty of negativity even from positive news.
Personally, i'm excited.. I still have faith that this is the cure.
05-02-2012 06:31 AM
NZGuy
It worries me that 37% of the placebo group showed an increase in hair density. That shows me that those who were measuring the results wanted to see an increase. Even in a double blind situation they wanted positive results.
If someone understands this differently from me I'd be keen to hear your interpretation.
05-02-2012 06:32 AM
WillhasWill
The great news is that safety analysis is good. This and the fact that early efficacy analysis shows statistically significant hair growth means it will move forward and they will invest in the next clinical trial phase. Great news!
However, so far only 3.2% increase in terminal hair from baseline. So if I'm not mistaken their are no signs yet of this being an improved treatment compared to existing treatments available.
But this will hopefully be improved and Replicel are here to stay for the time being. Go Replicel!
05-02-2012 07:03 AM
yeahyeahyeah
Quote:
Originally Posted by WillhasWill
The great news is that safety analysis is good. This and the fact that early efficacy analysis shows statistically significant hair growth means it will move forward and they will invest in the next clinical trial phase. Great news!
However, so far only 3.2% increase in terminal hair from baseline. So if I'm not mistaken their are no signs yet of this being an improved treatment compared to existing treatments available.
But this will hopefully be improved and Replicel are here to stay for the time being. Go Replicel!
Remember guys, they injected this shit at the TEMPLES. The hardest place to regrow hair.
pessimistic guys.
05-02-2012 07:04 AM
yeahyeahyeah
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scorpion
So it's basically like Minoxidil, Finasteride? How effective is it compared to aforementioned treatments? Just another thing we can add to the arsenal? Now it will be the big 4 instead of big 3 or what?
Yes, WITHOUT the sides!
05-02-2012 07:07 AM
oracle
We need to see the data stratified by sex before getting down on the numbers. 9 of the 19 subjects were female. It seems to me that this treatment would more effective in men due to the quality cells in the male donor area. I don't think women have this stable donor area to pull cells from which, which could compromise their results.
05-02-2012 07:20 AM
Thinning@30
At first glance, these results while positive, don't seem that impressive. I wonder if this will be like Histogen though, where greater efficacy was seen at the one year mark. Will the phase I subjects continue to be monitored? Also, it is not clear yet if the treatment is compoundable or if the injections could "immunize" follicles against further loss.
Also, remember that the Replicel injections were to the subjects' temples, which are considered much more difficult to treat than the crown. It could be more effective in other parts of the scalp, we just don't know yet. Maybe in the future we'll get stem cell treatments and a conventional FUE transplant for the hairline.
Like so many of you, I was hoping Replicel would demonstrate greater than 20.0% increase in terminal hairs, and we'd be seeing pictures of thick patches of hair where before there was only slick bald skin, but I still think there is room for some cautious optimism. I'm looking forward to Replicel's interview with Spencer.
Also, completely off-topic, the Project Norma researchers were supposed to put out a newsletter last week regarding the status of their Astressin-b trial, has anyone heard from them?
05-02-2012 07:29 AM
uninformed
Quote:
Originally Posted by NZGuy
It worries me that 37% of the placebo group showed an increase in hair density. That shows me that those who were measuring the results wanted to see an increase. Even in a double blind situation they wanted positive results.
If someone understands this differently from me I'd be keen to hear your interpretation.
How can you be biased when all you are doing is counting hair?
