Home | News | Find a Doctor | Ask a Question | Free

AskMen.com: Future Balding Treatments


#1

http://www.askmen.com/sports/health_200/223_mens_health.html

More of just a summary of hair cloning and the follica method but I thought there were a few things of some interest…

“Intercytex predicts treatment to be available within five years (before 2013).”

“However, companies like the Britain-based Intercytex are developing a cell therapy process for male-pattern baldness, and in June 2008, the company announced a successful phase II trial of its hair implantation tests.”

“There is no determinable date as to when [the follica treatment] might be available given that trials can last years. As soon as 2015 or 2018 could be a possibility, but that’s being generous.”


#2

ICX is well known around here.

Most of us think their TRC hair project (but not ICX as a whole) is in trouble or even virtually dead. ICX is still interested in experimenting with it, but only using other people’s money now.

Folica will probably hit sooner. And the first thing Folica releases for hair regrowth will almost certainly work a lot better than the first thing ICX releases.

Folica could be well before 2018. We just don’t know about this one yet.


#3

» ICX is well known around here.
»
» Most of us think their TRC hair project (but not ICX as a whole) is in
» trouble or even virtually dead. ICX is still interested in experimenting
» with it, but only using other people’s money now.
»
»
»
»
» Folica will probably hit sooner. And the first thing Folica releases for
» hair regrowth will almost certainly work a lot better than the first thing
» ICX releases.
»
» Folica could be well before 2018. We just don’t know about this one yet.

i think 2018 is realistic for follica if you consider that FDA-tests normally last 10 years.

as for intercytex, if its not dead now, then it will be out much sooner than follica.


#4

» » ICX is well known around here.
» »
» » Most of us think their TRC hair project (but not ICX as a whole) is in
» » trouble or even virtually dead. ICX is still interested in
» experimenting
» » with it, but only using other people’s money now.
» »
» »
» »
» »
» » Folica will probably hit sooner. And the first thing Folica releases
» for
» » hair regrowth will almost certainly work a lot better than the first
» thing
» » ICX releases.
» »
» » Folica could be well before 2018. We just don’t know about this one
» yet.
»
» i think 2018 is realistic for follica if you consider that FDA-tests
» normally last 10 years.
»
» as for intercytex, if its not dead now, then it will be out much sooner
» than follica.

Yes, I agree, if you want something soon, then it’s ICX or nothing


#5

Follica at 2018 ?? I hope its way earlier than that - by 2013 or 14. Does anyone know if theyve released any results of that study (Follica + Harvard), or if any more human trials are underway ?

» » » ICX is well known around here.
» » »
» » » Most of us think their TRC hair project (but not ICX as a whole) is
» in
» » » trouble or even virtually dead. ICX is still interested in
» » experimenting
» » » with it, but only using other people’s money now.
» » »
» » »
» » »
» » »
» » » Folica will probably hit sooner. And the first thing Folica releases
» » for
» » » hair regrowth will almost certainly work a lot better than the first
» » thing
» » » ICX releases.
» » »
» » » Folica could be well before 2018. We just don’t know about this one
» » yet.
» »
» » i think 2018 is realistic for follica if you consider that FDA-tests
» » normally last 10 years.
» »
» » as for intercytex, if its not dead now, then it will be out much sooner
» » than follica.
»
» Yes, I agree, if you want something soon, then it’s ICX or nothing


#6

» Follica at 2018 ?? I hope its way earlier than that - by 2013 or 14. Does
» anyone know if theyve released any results of that study (Follica +
» Harvard), or if any more human trials are underway ?
»
Firstly FDA tests will not be 10 years long! Remember everything Follica is using has already been approved! Its just the method of application that needs to be approved! Until Follica starts human trials on the actual product itself then you just cant put a time scale to it! Wait until they have finished their trials for wounding first! This should be around the middle of next year!

Secondly Intercytex is not dead! Well not completely! Expectation was blown out of all proportion for them and when their results didnt yield completely full heads of hair with 120cm per sq cm people instantly wrote it off as a failure! There is far too much reading between the lines going on!

Just read through the sources for that article and i dont know where he has got 2018 from!!! Only one website said 10years and that was livescience.com and that was not listed! Unless someone who works for ICX or Follica is writing or posting about this then know one can say for sure!!!


#7

» » Follica at 2018 ?? I hope its way earlier than that - by 2013 or 14.
» Does
» » anyone know if theyve released any results of that study (Follica +
» » Harvard), or if any more human trials are underway ?
» »
» Firstly FDA tests will not be 10 years long! Remember everything Follica
» is using has already been approved! Its just the method of application that
» needs to be approved! Until Follica starts human trials on the actual
» product itself then you just cant put a time scale to it! Wait until they
» have finished their trials for wounding first! This should be around the
» middle of next year!
»
» Secondly Intercytex is not dead! Well not completely! Expectation was
» blown out of all proportion for them and when their results didnt yield
» completely full heads of hair with 120cm per sq cm people instantly wrote
» it off as a failure! There is far too much reading between the lines going
» on!
»
» Just read through the sources for that article and i dont know where he
» has got 2018 from!!! Only one website said 10years and that was
» livescience.com and that was not listed! Unless someone who works for ICX
» or Follica is writing or posting about this then know one can say for
» sure!!!

I think it was more that Intercytex basically said that they weren’t willing to go ahead without a partner. If they had something really good you’d think they’d be steaming ahead parter or no partner.


#8

Follica and InterCytex aren’t talking to anyone, so I call BS on that article. It was written by someone who doesn’t know anymore about hairloss research than we do; I wouldn’t put much stock in a speculative piece.

If you want proof that article isn’t kosher than look at those timelines. That article claimed InterCytex would be out in 2013 when they don’t even have a financial partner to take TRC past phase III? To top it off, InterCytex’s management team is run by incompetents; they failed to meet every single timeline. Follica, on the other hand, is sitting on a healthy pile of cash, and they’re staffed by some of the most qualified academics, and pharmaceutical executives (with actual experience bringing new products to market).

If anything, Follica has a better chance to reach market than InterCytex.


#9

This is a very old debate that we’ve all had before.

Look, I’m an optimist as far as HM in general. But let me be blunt:

ICX has tested on about half a dozen men, some of which didn’t even come back. They have produced no pics of any real cosmetically-useful progress, not even in a small section.

And if you read between the lines about their statistics it points in the same direction. For all we know, 80-100% of their documented growth might still potentially be explained by the dermbrasion effects alone.

I want near-term HM as much as anyone. But as far as ICX-TRC phases 1-2 are concerned, Occam’s Razar says that it probably just can’t regrow a goddamn thing.


#10

» This is a very old debate that we’ve all had before.
»
»
»
» Look, I’m an optimist as far as HM in general. But let me be blunt:
»
» ICX has tested on about half a dozen men, some of which didn’t even come
» back. They have produced no pics of any real cosmetically-useful progress,
» not even in a small section.
»
» And if you read between the lines about their statistics it points in the
» same direction. For all we know, 80-100% of their documented growth might
» still potentially be explained by the dermbrasion effects
» alone.

»
»
» I want near-term HM as much as anyone. But as far as ICX-TRC phases 1-2
» are concerned, Occam’s Razar says that it probably just can’t regrow a
» goddamn thing.

You do have to consider that in the current financial climate finding a partner or investor would be difficult to do. Esp over here! Not sure many people would invest unless ICX had something very special! Having said that they may well get investment based on some of the other work they do! It may well be a company based investment rather than just an investment into one particular project! Let ICX run its course and see what happens!

Oh and i completely agree about that article being BS!


#11

If ICX could produce clear evidence of a cosmeticaly significant hair improvement then I don’t think they’d have any problem getting funding.

They were seeking financial partners for phase III several months before the credit crunch this fall, and they weren’t getting offers.


#12

Unlike Follica, InterCytex is publicly traded. They could raise capital through the stock market if they chose to be less clandestine than the CIA (you know… show us some statistically significant data, before/after pictures, etc…). Alternatively, InterCytex could follow Follica’s footsteps to raise venture capital to complete their TRC research stream.

Unfortunately both options are dependent on a competent executive team, and scientific results. Something tells me InterCytex has neither.


#13

» Unlike Follica, InterCytex is publicly traded. They could raise capital
» through the stock market if they chose to be less clandestine than the CIA
» (you know… show us some statistically significant data, before/after
» pictures, etc…). Alternatively, InterCytex could follow Follica’s
» footsteps to raise venture capital to complete their TRC research stream.
»
» Unfortunately both options are dependent on a competent executive team,
» and scientific results. Something tells me InterCytex has neither.

i dont think the management of intercytex is responsible for the delays. if there are scientifical problems in the research, what can the management do about it?


#14

There’s really no way they will release around 2013 they’ll be bankrupt by then . I truly believe
we’re 2-3 max away from a treatment /. There’s way to much money to make and it’s not just 1 company in the race . Just sit tight and wait / When botox came out it spread like wild fire /


#15

Agreed. and hope so. if only they’d release quarterly, or even half yearly updates on exactly what theyre doing…

» There’s really no way they will release around 2013 they’ll be bankrupt by
» then . I truly believe
» we’re 2-3 max away from a treatment /. There’s way to much money to make
» and it’s not just 1 company in the race . Just sit tight and wait / When
» botox came out it spread like wild fire /


#16

» i dont think the management of intercytex is responsible for the delays.
» if there are scientifical problems in the research, what can the management
» do about it?

Poor management sinks companies everyday. InterCytex’s management could put a better spin on TRC to raise funds for further research (via venture capital, the stock market, etc…) They could also recruit scientific staff to expedite their agenda. Solid management grows brands. Poor management handicaps progress.


#17

True, but this would assume that the company has a good fundamental product to sell. As pointed out by several others, they dont seem to have that. Any company can come up with an IPO. there will be people who would take the risk and invest in something like this.

But that doesnt prove anything about intercytex. On the other hand, private equity investors analyse their investments in much more detail (read: in follica). If 11M is invested as series B funding now, they should expect returns in 5 years. The returns im talking about are around 19X for seed funding (the original 5.5M) and 5X for series B funding (this varies from firm to firm, and on the market)

Also, Intercytex’s results for phase 2 are all of 2 lines which say that density has increased. no pics, no real data. If I had money running on intercytex, Id pull out or turn my attention to the progress of their other products (which seem to show more promise)

On an unrelated note, Follica’s modus operandi seems dangerously similar to that hedgehog agonist stuff from last year, which ended in failure cos the safety precautions could not be met. any thoughts ?

» Poor management sinks companies everyday. InterCytex’s management could
» put a better spin on TRC to raise funds for further research (via venture
» capital, the stock market, etc…) They could also recruit scientific staff
» to expedite their agenda. Solid management grows brands. Poor management
» handicaps progress.


#18

I share your concerns, but my take on InterCytex is pretty firm: a) either their management team is utterly incompetent or b) either they’re committing shareholder fraud with dead-end science.

If the science behind TRC needs improvement than a competent management team would gather the necessary resources to finish this project promptly. Statistically significant data along with before and after pictures would easily secure investor/shareholder dollars. On the other hand, if the science behind TRC is truly dead than management should desist their vague reports because that’s comparable to shareholder fraud. I know that sounds inflammatory, but where’s the data? where are the photos? They’ve been doing this long enough to have something tangible to show by now.

» True, but this would assume that the company has a good fundamental product
» to sell. As pointed out by several others, they dont seem to have that. Any
» company can come up with an IPO. there will be people who would take the
» risk and invest in something like this.
»
» But that doesnt prove anything about intercytex. On the other hand,
» private equity investors analyse their investments in much more detail
» (read: in follica). If 11M is invested as series B funding now, they should
» expect returns in 5 years. The returns im talking about are around 19X for
» seed funding (the original 5.5M) and 5X for series B funding (this varies
» from firm to firm, and on the market)
»
» Also, Intercytex’s results for phase 2 are all of 2 lines which say that
» density has increased. no pics, no real data. If I had money running on
» intercytex, Id pull out or turn my attention to the progress of their other
» products (which seem to show more promise)

Follica seem to have a struck the right balance between administration and research. I feel comfortable knowing they have a management team experienced bringing life-sciences to market. I’m also encouraged by their scientific/academic associations. Only time will tell where a competent team will take us (because we already know what incompetence yields)

» On an unrelated note, Follica’s modus operandi seems dangerously similar
» to that hedgehog agonist stuff from last year, which ended in failure cos
» the safety precautions could not be met. any thoughts ?


#19

I share the general concerns that Folica’s deal could be stopped for percieved dangers with it.

Honestly I doubt the danger is real. But the principle theories may pose cancer/tumor growth questions that may not be easily put to rest.

I really think the already approved status of these drugs may be a godsend for us just for safety approval alone, never mind if it takes the full 10 years and 3 stages.

I suspect that the sum of the original FDA testing to approve the drugs already + the new FDA testing for approval of Folica’s method = less total testing than if the drugs were first being developed right now for Folica’s project.


#20

» True, but this would assume that the company has a good fundamental product
» to sell. As pointed out by several others, they dont seem to have that. Any
» company can come up with an IPO. there will be people who would take the
» risk and invest in something like this.
»
» But that doesnt prove anything about intercytex. On the other hand,
» private equity investors analyse their investments in much more detail
» (read: in follica). If 11M is invested as series B funding now, they should
» expect returns in 5 years. The returns im talking about are around 19X for
» seed funding (the original 5.5M) and 5X for series B funding (this varies
» from firm to firm, and on the market)
»
» Also, Intercytex’s results for phase 2 are all of 2 lines which say that
» density has increased. no pics, no real data. If I had money running on
» intercytex, Id pull out or turn my attention to the progress of their other
» products (which seem to show more promise)
»
» On an unrelated note, Follica’s modus operandi seems dangerously similar
» to that hedgehog agonist stuff from last year, which ended in failure cos
» the safety precautions could not be met. any thoughts ?
»
» » Poor management sinks companies everyday. InterCytex’s management could
» » put a better spin on TRC to raise funds for further research (via
» venture
» » capital, the stock market, etc…) They could also recruit scientific
» staff
» » to expedite their agenda. Solid management grows brands. Poor
» management
» » handicaps progress.

I cannot see this being similar to “Curis” which took advantage of the hedgehog agonist. It did fail due to safety reasons but unlike curis Follica is dealing with the body’s natural regeneration process