» -Is’t there any risk that taking an EGF antagonist through out the wounding
» may halt the natural healing process and the building of new
» tissue-epithelial cells ?
»
» -However, your “theory” baccy about the fact that the body may need a
» certain period of time with EFG antagonist intake until it gets to the
» desired status sounds rational to me.
From the patent
Example 12: Enhancement of EDIHN by inhibition of EGF receptor. (Mouse skin—which takes 11 days to reepilthialize vs. 3 days for people in shallow wounds)
To determine the effect of administration of EGF receptor inhibitors on DIHN, the inhibitor AG1478 (150 μM in 10 μL volume) was administered as a single injection 11 days after incisional wounding (1 cm2) to the middle of the wound near the skin surface. EGF receptor inhibitor administration led to generation of more and larger hair follicles compared with control mice that were wounded only (Figure 26A). As shown in Figure 26B, large hair follicles developed in the wounded area in the AG1478-injected mice. Left panel: epidermis stained for K 17, with three large hair follicles next to each other. Right panel: dermis stained for AP with large coalescing dermal papilla areas.
The findings of this Example confirm the results of the previous Example, and show that more and larger HF can be generated when EDIHN comprises, or is followed by, administration of EGFR inhibitors, or with compounds with a similar mechanism of action; e.g., Hedgehog protein and androgen antagonists.
What this shows is that they could wait 11 days after wouding, when the skin was almost finished re-epilithializing in the mice before administering an EGF antagonist, and still get a much heightened response.
Inhibition of new hair by ADDING EGF 11 days into the process (mice again).
Example 11: Inhibition of EDIHN by epidermal growth factor injection.
21 day-old mice were wounded as described in previous Examples. Starting from day 11 after wounding, a time point corresponding to the point at which the wound had recently re-epithelialized, 10 mL of 1 mg/ml EGF was injected into the wound bed. EGF was injected once per day after this point for a total of 5 days. Three days later, the skin was collected, and whole-mount EDIHN assays were performed. EGF prevented HF formation as assessed by gross morphology . In addition, whole mounts of control and treated skin were analyzed with anti-K17 antibody immunostaining. All mice injected with EGF (n=4) exhibited no new HF formation (Figures 25 A-B), while control mice (n=2) had many new HF, as expected. (Figures 25 C-D).
In an additional experiment, recombinant EGF (1 microgram
(mcg)/microliter (mcl)) was injected at days 11, 13 and 15 after wounding.
Skin was collected at 18 days after wounding and stained for K17 and alkaline phosphotase. Once again, administration of EGF inhibited EDIHN.
The skin has to re-epilithialize for hair to form or be stopped from forming either way, at least in mice. I dont know whether or not inhibiting EGF before this time will matter or not. I suspect it would be OK to do so, but uneccessary to get hair unless there are more profound differences between our skin and mice skin than I heretofore expected. Somebody could probably do a search on “reepililthialization and EGF” and find out more (not me though, Im tired).
The findings of this Example show that EGF inhibits HF formation. Thus, inhibiting EGF, EGFR, or one of the pathways in which they participate increases EDIHN- induced HF formation.
