Okay, the science reporting in the Daily Mail is generally awful. However, the interesting bit of this story (IMO), I have emboldened. Also it concerns PGD2, which we have all been talking about.
A cure for baldness may be available on the market sooner than previously thought after a breakthrough in negotiations between scientists and drugs companies.
Scientists at the University of Pennsylvania believe they have discovered the reason for baldness, an enzyme which shuts down hair follicles. Dr George Cotsarelis announced this week that he is in talks with several pharmaceutical companies about developing treatments which could be available in two years,
Cure: The discovery this year could revolutionise treatment for baldness
Drugs that block the protein are already available on the marked as they are used to treat asthma and allergies.
Dr Cotsarelis and his dermatological team at the University of Pennsylvania, discovered that enzyme Prostaglandin D2 (PGD2) prevented hair follicles from maturing.
The link between genetics and baldness have long been common knowledge but not the cause.
But when the team analysed the scalps of balding men, they found levels of PDG2 to be three times higher in areas in which the hair was thinning.
Earlier work by the same team found bald men have cells capable of making hair; they have just failed to mature.
It is thought that PGD2 prevents the cells maturing - and stopping it from working would allow hair to grow again.
In tests on lab and on mice, the compound stunted hair growth, the journal Science Translational Medicine reported in March.
‘Blockers’ of the enzyme have been formulated as pills to cure asthma and allergic conditions but it should be possible to turn them into a lotion which could be applied to the scalp.
Hair we go: At the moment men have very few options for treating baldness
Dr Cotsarelis, said: ‘The nice thing about dermatology and hair loss in general is that you can take compounds that maybe are being used as a pill and put them in a topical formulation.
‘We certainly think it would be good at preventing hair loss but we don’t know for sure that it would regrow.’
Lab test suggest the treatment may also help women who are losing their hair.
Female hair loss carries an even greater stigma than the male condition, but is not as uncommon as many people may believe.
About 40 per cent of women suffer from some form of hair loss as a result of hormone changes during menopause.
For men this number is significantly higher according to Dr Cotsarelis.
By the age of 50 nearly half of all men have some degree of male pattern baldness, a number which rockets to 70 per cent by the age of 70.
Dr Cotsarelis said: ‘We think these findings will have implications beyond male pattern baldness but, even if they don’t, we think it will be exciting.
‘There is a large number of people who would rather have hair than not.’
If developed the drug would revolutionise the hair regrowth market.
Britain’s 7.4million bald and balding men have limited options of cures for their conditions.
Hair transplants are painful and expensive and success is variable.
The only two drugs available have high-risk side effects.
Testosterone blocker Propecia may cause impotence and a second drug, Amexidil, which increase blood flow to the hair follicles could in fact accelerate hair loss.
Other treatments in development elsewhere include a jab that uses fat cells from the tummy to pep up hair growth on the scalp.
Cotsarelis’ team said that the new drug could be on the market in as little as two years.
Pretty meaningless, almost everything works on mice - not looking to rain on anybody’s parade but we have heard the same estimates over and over again, of course it will happen eventually, we just don’t know when that is.
» »
» » In tests on lab and on mice
» »
»
» Pretty meaningless, almost everything works on mice - not looking to rain
» on anybody’s parade but we have heard the same estimates over and over
» again, of course it will happen eventually, we just don’t know when that
» is.
Very true.
Still, it makes a nice change from “five more years.”
» »
» » In tests on lab and on mice
» »
»
» Pretty meaningless, almost everything works on mice - not looking to rain
» on anybody’s parade but we have heard the same estimates over and over
» again, of course it will happen eventually, we just don’t know when that
» is.
You’re right but the thing is that IF the PGD2 model for hair loss turns out to be correct then it really could be 2 years OR LESS till a true cure hits the market. OK, we don’t know for sure that the PGD2 model is correct but that is the only question left since Cotseralis has worked out a deal with the drug companies and since the molecules are already in the marketplace. The only thing left is determining for sure if the PGD2 model for hair growth will actually work.
And since he has worked out a deal with the drug companies that means that he will likely be testing the PGD2 antagonists that are already on the market to see if they will grow hair, and if they will grow hair the best way to formulate the drugs to do that.
» If the cure is already fda approved for other health issues why aren’t
» those people not recoverying their hair already?
This is good news. He likely wanted to work out a deal with the drug-makers before he would invest more of his time and resources into studying the PGD2 model for hair growh. The fact that he worked out a deal with the drug companies is a sign that he wants to do further testing and intends to do so. It’s also a sign that he wants to get right on it because the time-frame that he gave (2 years) means that he plans to get to work (further testing) right away. He probably has to test the PGD2 receptor blockers to see:
If they can be made to induce hair growth.
The best way to formulate these available drugs to grow hair if they will grow hair. Remember that PGD2 is a postaglanding that causes hair loss. There are also postaglandins that cause hair to grow. He believes that the best way to grow hair with a PGD2 receptor blocker is to add a postaglandin that grows hair - a 2-pronged attack. He has to figure out the correct balance/formulation.
We don’t know yet for sure if PGD2 antagonists will grow hair or not but we do have some tantalizing scientific information already available which proves that PGD2 doe cause hair to be lost and that there is 3 times as much PGD2 in balding scalp as there is in non-balding scalp. So there is reason for hope that a PGD2 antagonist (that blocks the PGD2 receptor) could be the solutuon to hair loss.
Based on this new news, which I think is BIG news, I think that if the PGD2 model for hair growth is correct then we will get out hair back in 2 years. And it could be significantly sooner. It depends on how fast he can complete the testing. These types of molecules are already available so he just has to figure out if they can be made to grow hair and how to formulate them for the best results. One problem with the PGD2 receptor blockers that are on the market is that they are kind of weak. Stronger ones are in the pipeline but won’t be available for a couple of years.
I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources she is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email please let me know.
» formulate them for the best results. One problem with the PGD2 receptor
» blockers that are on the market is that they are kind of weak. Stronger
» ones are in the pipeline but won’t be available for a couple of years.
we really dont need a pgd2 blocker but a receptor blocker. pgd2 blocking will be quite a pointless endeavor… if you forget to take your treatment just once, all your receptors could get saturated within a few hours rendering previous efforts futile. We need to block the receptors not the pgd2… pgd2 will always be there and will always be produced. we need to stop it from docking on to the receptors
» I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources she
» is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I
» have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email please
» let me know.
basically, i don’t think you might get anything trustworthy from a journalist, lol. If she tells you the source, go for it.
ANyway, is PGD2 even supposed to be able to “regrow” (a.k.a rejuvenate) miniaturized follicules ? I thought it was just a stop-further-hairloss remedy.
» I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources she
» is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I
» have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email please
» let me know.
»
» » formulate them for the best results. One problem with the PGD2 receptor
» » blockers that are on the market is that they are kind of weak. Stronger
» » ones are in the pipeline but won’t be available for a couple of years.
»
» we really dont need a pgd2 blocker but a receptor blocker. pgd2 blocking
» will be quite a pointless endeavor… if you forget to take your treatment
» just once, all your receptors could get saturated within a few hours
» rendering previous efforts futile. We need to block the receptors not the
» pgd2… pgd2 will always be there and will always be produced. we need to
» stop it from docking on to the receptors
I meant to say “PGD2 receptor blocker” rather than “PGD2 blocker.” I forgot the name of the receptor that PGD2 binds to. I know it starts with a “G” but I don’t remember the name of it so I just call those types of drugs “PGD2 receptor blockers.” When I refer to a “PGD2 receptor blocker” I am referring to the receptor that PGD2 binds to.
» I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources she
» is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I
» have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email please
» let me know.
»
I don’t know the source but if the story is true then this is good news for sure. Of course the PGD2 model for hair growth might be a false lead, but if it does turn out to be a good model then we are looking at 2 years or less for a cure, and Cotseralis is going gangbusters full-steam-ahead. He just has to finish some scientific fact-gathering and if that turns out well hair loss will be behind us by this time in 2014…maybe sooner.
» » I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources
» she
» » is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I
» » have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email
» please
» » let me know.
»
» have you tried Sara Malm via DailyMail.co.uk
Thank you, but of course I found the authors name, however I have been unable to find the corresponding email address.
thanks for this article. If these papers are not simply quoting each other then there probably really is more to this story. Great news in my opinion.
» basically, i don’t think you might get anything trustworthy from a
» journalist, lol. If she tells you the source, go for it.
usually I claim to run a hairloss forum or some online newspaper to give myself some credibility. It is common practice to be allowed to ask journalists to quote their sources. Possibly there is more than that one sentence in the source they are referring to. That’s what I’m hoping for.
the receptor has several names… the most common of which are GPR44 and CRTH2. And I am not familiar of a single FDA approved drug which inhibits these receptors apart from ramatroban - which however has other side effects such as decreased platlet production and other wierd things. Oxagens CRTH2 antagonist named OC000459 seems to be the most promising upcoming solution.
OK men,
Most of you know me from way back in old days back, 1997 on this board. I am always the smartass pessimest saying nothing will work, life sux, blah blah blah and of course “It’s saturday night and I’m bald!!” hehehe. I am going on the record here and saying that I think this will work. After all the trials and procedures we have placed faith in, this is the one. PGD2 inhibitor will save the day, be available to us by early next year and be cheap. I will be first to admit if I am wrong, but Im all in on this one boys.
Alec
» OK men,
» Most of you know me from way back in old days back, 1997 on this board. I
» am always the smartass pessimest saying nothing will work, life sux, blah
» blah blah and of course “It’s saturday night and I’m bald!!”
» hehehe. I am going on the record here and saying that I think this
» will work. After all the trials and procedures we have placed faith in,
» this is the one. PGD2 inhibitor will save the day, be available to us by
» early next year and be cheap. I will be first to admit if I am wrong, but
» Im all in on this one boys.
» Alec
Alec (it’s saturday night and I’m bald), how are you? I’m not 100% sure yet if a GPR44 blocker will grow hair or not because they haven’t applied a GPR44 receptor blocker to balding human follicles to see if it will grow hair or not. But, like yourself, I’m very hopeful about this potential cure for hair loss. If it proves to grow hair I don’t think it will be available by early next year but perhaps by the end of next year.
» @jarjarbinx
»
» the receptor has several names… the most common of which are GPR44 and
» CRTH2. And I am not familiar of a single FDA approved drug which inhibits
» these receptors apart from ramatroban - which however has other side
» effects such as decreased platlet production and other wierd things.
» Oxagens CRTH2 antagonist named OC000459 seems to be the most promising
» upcoming solution.
I’m not so sure that decreased platelet production is the end of the world.
You wouldn’t want to lose all platelet production but I don’t think it would do a lot of harm if it was reduced a little bit. They give heart-stent patients medicine to dramatically reduce their platelet production and it’s not killing them.
Also, the side effect risk would be greatly reduced as a topical solution. Keep in mind that minoxidil is one of the last lines of defense against high blood pressure because of its’ side effects and yet they can use it as a topical for hair loss because the risk of side effects is greatly reduced as a topical solution.
Ramatroban is a GPR44 blocker but isn’t cetirizine also a GPR44 blocker?
Cetirizine is weak and it doesn’t work continuously, but if it is a GPR44 receptor blocker then Cotseralis could use it on balding human hair follicles just to see if it has any effect on hair growth. Maybe you and I can’t use the dose we would need to in order to make it grow hair on us but in a lab Cotseralis could use cetirizine in high doses on balding human follicles in a test-tube just to see if the follicles get hair growth stimulation. That’s what I would do if I was him. I would grab some balding follicles, put them in a test-tube with a high dose of cetirizine and see if there is any stimulative affect. That might get the answer to the question - the final piece of the puzzle. Still it’s lack of strength and continued effect might prevent it from working whereas a strong continuous acting GPR44 blocker might work fine.
»
»
» Alec (it’s saturday night and I’m bald), how are you? I’m not 100% sure
» yet if a GPR44 blocker will grow hair or not because they haven’t applied a
» GPR44 receptor blocker to balding human follicles to see if it will grow
» hair or not. But, like yourself, I’m very hopeful about this potential cure
» for hair loss. If it proves to grow hair I don’t think it will be
» available by early next year but perhaps by the end of next year.
JJB
Good to hear from you, my fingers are crossed. I just have a funny feeling about this one. AB
» » I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources
» she
» » is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I
» » have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email
» please
» » let me know.
» »
»
» I don’t know the source but if the story is true then this is good news for
» sure. Of course the PGD2 model for hair growth might be a false lead, but
» if it does turn out to be a good model then we are looking at 2 years or
» less for a cure, and Cotseralis is going gangbusters full-steam-ahead. He
» just has to finish some scientific fact-gathering and if that turns out
» well hair loss will be behind us by this time in 2014…maybe sooner.a
I guess he isn’t talking about loreall’s neogenisis
» I tried to contact the author of that article to ask her which sources she
» is relying on when she says that cots is in talks with big pharma, but I
» have been unable to find an email address. If someone finds an email please
» let me know.
Based on the format that all employees incl journalists at daily mail use, her email should be either s.malm@dailymail.co.uk or sara.malm@dailymail.co.uk . See which one bounces back and you’ll know.
Appears to be her real name per her twitter page and also her blog.
She’s young, ~21, and originally from Sweden.
I can never remember, do we have any guesses for how the mechanism of this would operate?
Is this method just supposed to stimulate the existing follicles into growing in spite of their androgen damage?
Or is it supposed to act on the androgen damage itself (repair the damage, prevent any more of it, etc)?
A decent regrowth topical would good. But a regrowth topical that also gradually repairs the existing MPB damage would be much better. Then eventually we could be free of it, or at least very much less dependent on it.
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.
