Feel free to contribute quotes, etc. But here is a starting list for HM release dates from the specialists in the field. But note that by “release date” I’m assuming full-scale commercialization (I expect smaller scale commercialization will naturally be available sooner):
Martin Unger (HT surgeon who worked on HM): “at least” 10 years from 2004, which put the release date as 2014-2015… however Unger “acknowledges that Washenik and Aderans have changed the playing field by pumping millions of dollars into research”. http://www.wired.com/wired/archive/12.01/baldness.html?pg=2&topic=&topic_set=
William Rassman (HT surgeon): as of 2007, “years”, “less than 10 years”, “possibly decades”, “greater than 10 years” or “20 years for approval”, which would put the release at 2027!
for his numerous predictions
So what is the consensus? It seems clear to me that based on the predictions of these “insiders”, HM will first be available on a small scale by 2010 with full-scale commercialization several years later.
Very insightful post. However, the opinions of all of them mean as much as mine or yours, or anyone with the exception of those that actually are making things happen unlike the rest, which would be Paul Kemp. Even Ken Washenik’s views are not worth much in my eyes. I’ve seen more proof that ICX is the be all end all to getting this out, and I have seen nothing but meaningless timelines by transplant physicians that remind me of how we were once told the earth is flat before it was proven wrong.
Small scale release will be in 2008. Its release will be late in the year, like a guest making a late entrance to a party, but it will turn heads nonetheless.
I curious about the importance placed on ICX-TRC versus their other products in their pipeline and I would like your opinion on this.
My thoughts are that Intercytex could be pursuing its R&D on ICX-TRC more aggressively. However, taking the company as a whole, I can see a few reasons why they are not.
For starters, the company needs revenues so emphasis is being placed on Vavelta. For the next year or so, developing the market for this product will be key in their overall business strategy.
Next, ICX-Pro once approved by the FDA may hit the US market late 2008, early 2009. This product can provide a substantial amount of cash flow very quickly as entire hospitals and medical providers can be contracted to carry this product for their patients.
Additionally, if proven effective on larger wounds, their ICX-SKN will progress rapidly to large scale commercialization and will generate yet another, even larger source of cash flow. I’m guessing that this realistically could happen sometime mid 2009.
Though I’m excited about ICX-TRC, I see that it will take a considerable amount of time to generate a good amount of cash compared to Intercytex’s other products. For one, small scale commercialization will not occur until late 2008. Well, this time frame has been pushed back because originally you said that it would hit the market sometime during the summer of 08. The point is not to criticize but to better understand their business strategy. I’m wondering if ICX-TRC is being put on the back burner? With the lack of competition, there’s really no sense of urgency. But the sure size of this market is incredible so it’s hard for me to think that this may be the case. Then again, due to the nature of this product(autologous)- a considerable amount of money and time will be needed to build up their manufacturing capabilities. Emphasis on the progression of their other products first may better position them to take this massive market but may delay TRC’s eventual large scale commercialization.
I would say that if anyone can get a stem cell to “regenerate” a follicle even if the efficiency in terms of the number of follicles that regenerate or uptake is poor then if that hair can go through a single cycle then the timeline is about two years or less for research and two-three years for additional safety followed by larger scale phase III trials.
Any other scenario currently puts the timeline to about Severn years upwards just for the research. The reasoning is complex and uses myocardial research as an analogous comparable. The basis is that, if the stem cells need biochemical manipulation then the regulatory and safety hurdles increase exponentially.
I also totally agree with other posters that suggest that a surgeon 9even one that dables in research) is no better placed to guess the timeline than a gardner making comments about the biochemistry of genetically modifying crops.
I agree, marco – the HT surgeons don’t really know what they’re talking about, even Bernstein and Cooley. Kemp and Washenik are the ones who really know how their research is progressing (as well as Kurt Stenn, but he doesn’t seem to give interviews). But you know what’s great? There are now 3 reputable companies (in addition to the ones in East Asia) that are working on 3 different balness cure techniques – and all have 10 years of solid research backing them up. I’m still betting on 3-5 years, but I’m an optimist on this matter! Best, BB
» I would say that if anyone can get a stem cell to “regenerate” a follicle
» even if the efficiency in terms of the number of follicles that regenerate
» or uptake is poor then if that hair can go through a single cycle then the
» timeline is about two years or less for research and two-three years for
» additional safety followed by larger scale phase III trials.
»
» Any other scenario currently puts the timeline to about Severn years
» upwards just for the research. The reasoning is complex and uses
» myocardial research as an analogous comparable. The basis is that, if the
» stem cells need biochemical manipulation then the regulatory and safety
» hurdles increase exponentially.
»
» I also totally agree with other posters that suggest that a surgeon 9even
» one that dables in research) is no better placed to guess the timeline
» than a gardner making comments about the biochemistry of genetically
» modifying crops.
» Why don’t we just sit back and wait for the results that are coming in
» September from Intercytex for ICX-TRC.
»
» I personally believe Hair Multiplication will happen sooner than
» later!
ICX have always been very reserved when it comes to releasing info so don’t be surprised if sept/oct comes & they say very little.
Maro made a vaild point,they would have to wait to see if the hair cycles.
» » Why don’t we just sit back and wait for the results that are coming
» in
» » September from Intercytex for ICX-TRC.
» »
» » I personally believe Hair Multiplication will happen sooner than
» » later!
»
» ICX have always been very reserved when it comes to releasing info so
» don’t be surprised if sept/oct comes & they say very little.
» Maro made a vaild point,they would have to wait to see if the hair cycles.
It seems every time I try to get any information out of any thread, regardless of how it starts it seems to get locked. So you’re right- nothing will be gained here until ICX releases their statement. See ya next fall!
The question is not “when is HM going to be released”. The question is “when is what kind of HM going to be released”. The first generation of HM may well be released in the next 3 to 5 years, but that does not mean that every Tom, Dick and Harry will have access to it. Neither does it mean that whoever DOES have access to it will be able to grow a full head of hair. It is possible that the first generation will have a very limited release (possibly only in conjunction with a conventional hair transplant) and that it will only have a modest multiplication factor. It is possible that it will take many years before HM will be available to each and every one of us at a reasonable price.
However, it is also possible that 5 years from now we will have a product that works perfectly well.
The point is: Right now it’s all just speculation. (But personally, I don’t think that the first generation of HM will be the answer to our problem.)
I agree that what we’re saying is speculation… HOWEVER, there are 2 important points that I think some posters are missing… (FYI: I’m not directing this post at you, News).
First, there HAS been progress made in HM and similar therapies. Maybe not as fast as people would like, but there are examples of developments in terms of cell-based therapies for hair restoration. E.g., Phase I and II of Intercytex’ ICX-TRC, Aderans’ incorporation of the 3-D matrix to fuse both responder and promoter cells (thus ensuring neogenesis), Aderans Phase I trials, Cotsarelis’ "re"finding about wounding and stem cells, Fuchs and Cotsarelis’ findings on the WNT pathway and hair regeneration… this is ALL good news, folks!
Second, HM is NOT always 5 years away as some have stated. If you read what most people “in the know” have consistently been saying then the timeframe was 5-10 years for full commercialization about 2-3 years ago. So that’d mean HM is NOT 5 years away but really 2-7 years away. This is very much in line with all the proposed targets from Aderans and Intercytex, not to mention the timeline for Follica’s proposed procedures. And who knows? Small-scale commercialization could be here by 2008, as Intercytex is hoping.
So yes – it’s not as fast as we’d like – but I’m confident that progress is being made and our disease will be “solved”, but this time without potions, wigs, or butchering.
Best,
BB
» The question is not “when is HM going to be released”. The question is
» “when is what kind of HM going to be released”. The first
» generation of HM may well be released in the next 3 to 5 years, but that
» does not mean that every Tom, Dick and Harry will have access to it.
» Neither does it mean that whoever DOES have access to it will be able to
» grow a full head of hair. It is possible that the first generation will
» have a very limited release (possibly only in conjunction with a
» conventional hair transplant) and that it will only have a modest
» multiplication factor. It is possible that it will take many years before
» HM will be available to each and every one of us at a reasonable price.
» However, it is also possible that 5 years from now we will have a product
» that works perfectly well.
» The point is: Right now it’s all just speculation. (But personally, I
» don’t think that the first generation of HM will be the answer to our
» problem.)
the funny thing is there are no “insiders” nobody knows more than ICX so i wouldnt lose any sleep over a bunch of sour HT docs and analysts. we only know what ICX allows us to know.
» the funny thing is there are no “insiders” nobody knows more than ICX so i
» wouldnt lose any sleep over a bunch of sour HT docs and analysts. we only
» know what ICX allows us to know.
Good old post i found here. Some biggest frontrunners companies like Intercytex and Aderans promised to bring cure to market 2009-2010. And we know we don’t get nothing yet.
Intercytex is not possible to have cure from them 2010 and Washenik from Aderans told 2009 and this year is almost over too and it’ isn’t possible to get cure from them too.
Yea we know that Aderans started phase 2 studies (good news) about 4 months ago and those studies should be over after 3-4 months but this frustrates me that they removed from their website that HM should be available 2010 (2010 was new promised year?). I think they are not sure about their phase 2 studies success and that’s why they removed the year 2010 and this can mean only they don’t bring this cure to marked before the decade.
Somewhere i read that they are interested to co-operate with Intercytex but they are going to decide about this after their studies. Doesn’t this mean that they are searching backup because they are not sure about their phase 2 success? Big speculations. I haven’t heard any success of what they are doing and there isn’t a lot of news about them too. Someone smart should make interview with them to ask what they are doing and how succesful they are and how far the HM actually is and… I think they probably give new timeline “after 5 years”. To me seems that all HM researches like timeframe “after 5 years” because they don’t have any ideas about HM availability. “5 years” is good mark to hold up interest about the HM and the meaning that 5 years flies fast and soon we all have full head of hair. Delays sucks…
If Aderans’s phase#2 results are good then we’re probably in business within 4-6 years after that time.
If Aderans’s phase#2 is bad then we’re in deep sh*t, at least in the short term.
If that happens I’m sure they will make excuses for why it’s not a big deal. But realistically it’s a very big deal. It would probably mean that some aspect of their plan is too seriously flawed to fix without major re-work, and that would put them back to a decade away. At which point, that would probably put them no closer to commercial market than Folica’s effort.
I think Folica is quite likely to work at some point in the future, but I think it’s a long way off. If they put in a consistent effort then it’s probably over 5 years but under 15 years off.
everybody just throws out random number of years based on nothing, lol…nobody knows sh*t until there is a working product that grows more than a sprout of random hairs and consistently.
all the 2-5 year, 4-6 year, 5-10 year and 15-20 year predictions are based on opinion. if HM works it will be huge and who knows how soon or how long it will take to push it through the door on a commercial basis. there are ways to cut corners to get it out faster and there are just as many ways it could get held up and delayed.
if you go back further in this thread then you will see posters and doctors have been making these nostradomas predictions since early 2000.
well i dont think personally HM will be here soon…they havent event made an oral pill or a topical that its gonna be better than the other 2 that already excist.
first its gonna come a treatment and after HM…
» everybody just throws out random number of years based on nothing,
» lol…nobody knows sh*t until there is a working product that grows more
» than a sprout of random hairs and consistently.
»
» all the 2-5 year, 4-6 year, 5-10 year and 15-20 year predictions are based
» on opinion.
Not true. The average FDA trial takes 7-9 years. Tack on another year to get it in the hands of the consumer. Given this FACT, one can make an educated guess how long some of these products will take to get through the pipeline if they work. If Aderans works, and they just started their stage II trials, it is not “opinion” to expect them to have it on the market in 5 years. If Follica isn’t even in Stage I yet, then it is not "opinion to expect them to be 9-12 years out (if it works).
» » everybody just throws out random number of years based on nothing,
» » lol…nobody knows sh*t until there is a working product that grows
» more
» » than a sprout of random hairs and consistently.
» »
» » all the 2-5 year, 4-6 year, 5-10 year and 15-20 year predictions are
» based
» » on opinion.
»
» Not true. The average FDA trial takes 7-9 years. Tack on another year to
» get it in the hands of the consumer. Given this FACT, one can make an
» educated guess how long some of these products will take to get through the
» pipeline if they work. If Aderans works, and they just started their stage
» II trials, it is not “opinion” to expect them to have it on the market in
» 5 years. If Follica isn’t even in Stage I yet, then it is not "opinion to
» expect them to be 9-12 years out (if it works).
Though one has to wonder if Aderans has success in the stage II proof-of-concept trials whether or not they wouldn’t fast track a phase III trial for say Asia immediately?
Isn’t Aderans owned by a Japanese parent company? There are plenty of rich, balding men in Asia and Europe (actually probably as many in the US if not more) that would likely pay a lot if something like this would work.
Follica and Aderans have to get the proof of concept right first, the trial stuff after that will take care of itself.
» » Not true. The average FDA trial takes 7-9 years. Tack on another year
» to
» » get it in the hands of the consumer. Given this FACT, one can make an
» » educated guess how long some of these products will take to get through
» the
» » pipeline if they work. If Aderans works, and they just started their
» stage
» » II trials, it is not “opinion” to expect them to have it on the market
» in
» » 5 years. If Follica isn’t even in Stage I yet, then it is not "opinion
» to
» » expect them to be 9-12 years out (if it works).
Exactly.
» Though one has to wonder if Aderans has success in the stage II
» proof-of-concept trials whether or not they wouldn’t fast track a phase III
» trial for say Asia immediately?
»
» Isn’t Aderans owned by a Japanese parent company? There are plenty of
» rich, balding men in Asia and Europe (actually probably as many in the US
» if not more) that would likely pay a lot if something like this would work.
»
»
» Follica and Aderans have to get the proof of concept right first, the
» trial stuff after that will take care of itself.
I agree about Folica and proof of concept being needed before anything else happens. That’s why I say they’ve probably got a full decade ahead of them before we’re buying anything.
But with Aderans they should be past that. If they produce a phase#2 result that indicates anything viable enough to continue funding, then it must look good enough to already qualify as valid “proof of concept” and then some.
This is an advertising site for paid
advertisers to showcase successful hair restoration results only. It is not the
mandate of this site to engage in the discussion of failed, unsuccessful
procedures, lawsuits, litigations, refunds or complaint cases. Surgical hair
restoration procedures carry risks. Please do thorough research, consult your
own physician and investigate a doctor's background carefully before making a
decision. By proceeding to use our site, you agree to abide by our Terms of Use & Privacy Policy at http://hairsite.com/terms-of-use/ where you can also find a list of HairSite's sponsoring physicians.
