Topical penta-peptide Gly-Pro-Ile-Gly-Ser increases proportion of thick hair in AGA

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
  • Demeter
    Junior Member
    • Mar 2016
    • 23

    Topical penta-peptide Gly-Pro-Ile-Gly-Ser increases proportion of thick hair in AGA


    Results

    The penta-peptide significantly stimulated the proliferation of human hair keratinocytes at a concentration of 2.3 μm (P < 0.01), and 5.0 μm of this peptide had a marked effect on hair shaft elongation in the organ culture (P < 0.05). The change in the proportion of thick hair (≥60 μm) compared to baseline in patients that received the peptide was significantly higher than in the placebo (P = 0.006). The change in the proportion of vellus hair (<40 μm) was also significantly lower in the peptide group than in the placebo (P = 0.029). The penta-peptide also significantly improved the appearance of baldness (P = 0.020) when blinded reviewers graded photographs of the participants according to a standardized baldness scale. No adverse dermatological effects due to treatment were noted during this clinical study.
    Anyone have journal access to see whether this "significant" improvement was actually comparable to current treatments?
  • sagat
    Junior Member
    • Jul 2015
    • 25

    #2
    Just skimmed over it and I don't see any "significant" improvement. They had 3 asian volunteers with some crown balding with minor improvement. Would probably achieve same result with minox.

    Comment

    • Demeter
      Junior Member
      • Mar 2016
      • 23

      #3
      Originally posted by sagat
      Just skimmed over it and I don't see any "significant" improvement. They had 3 asian volunteers with some crown balding with minor improvement. Would probably achieve same result with minox.
      Do they put any objective numbers to it? like X% increase in terminal hairs? or is it just subjective appraisals?

      Also the abstract said they tested it on 22 people, not 3, or are you saying its only 3 people who saw any improvement?

      Either way, minox style gains sounds significant (not that photos can't be faked/misleading), especially if the no side effects thing holds up in larger trials.

      There doesn't need to be one hugely effective treatment if there's a combination of topicals that does the same job, especially if they all work via different synergistic mechanisms of action.

      Comment

      • sagat
        Junior Member
        • Jul 2015
        • 25

        #4
        I just looked at the before and after pictures they provided in the body of the article. Visual results is all I care about. I could send you the article pm me.

        BTW minoxidil type results is an exaggeration on my part lol.

        Comment

        • Demeter
          Junior Member
          • Mar 2016
          • 23

          #5
          Bear in mind that this study was only over a 4 month period. Other topicals like minox/ketoconazole take over a year to hit their peak regrowth potential. Most treatments only start to become noticeably effective after 3 months, because of how long it takes hairs to cycle.

          You should really go on objective hair-counts rather than photos. Photos are too easy to mess with with lighting and styling, or just downright lie and put the "before" picture as the after so it looks like hair loss has reversed.

          Comment

          • cardib
            Senior Member
            • Jan 2016
            • 128

            #6
            can this be purchased?
            Originally posted by Demeter
            http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/1...12216/abstract


            Anyone have journal access to see whether this "significant" improvement was actually comparable to current treatments?

            Comment

            • Demeter
              Junior Member
              • Mar 2016
              • 23

              #7
              I assume one of the many suppliers of research chemicals that sell peptides will offer it but there doesn't seem to be a readily available online source, its a fairly rare and recent peptide that you probably need to talk to a specialist to acquire. Even so it will likely be prohibitively expensive until someone starts mass producing it.

              There's nowhere near enough evidence to recommend it as a safe or effective treatment so I wouldn't recommend anyone start using it. It's just something that might possibly become a useful treatment or provide interesting new avenues of research.

              Also for those without journal access here's an earlier open-access study of the GPIGS peptide in mice which describes in a lot of detail its effect on cell-signalling (specifically the PI-3K/Akt pathway). It also provides some objective stats on its effects, including a 40% increase in the number of hair bulb Keratinocytes (HBKs) at the highest tested dose.

              The aim of this study was to discover a novel agent that promotes hair growth. We carried out a screening test in 298 types of conditioned medium (CM) from cultures of bacteria by using a hair bulb keratinocyte (HBK) growth assay. As a result, we found a HBK growth factor in the CM of Bacillus sp. M &#8230;


              Free full PDF of study - https://www.jstage.jst.go.jp/article.../28_3_485/_pdf

              Comment

              Working...