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

ICX II results pretty good


#1

Honestly I don’t understand what you babies are crying about. If I got a 13%-103% increase in the number of hairs on my balding area, terminal hairs mind you I would be very happy. There are several things to look on the bright side about here they are showing more consistent results than anyone else before, no other company is this far ahead, and they have only had this past year to really try and get a technique and dosage down for this product.

I for one am pleased with the results. I see this as real progress beyond what anyone has done before. To those of you like Frodo who say you can’t wait anymore what else are you going to do kill yourself? Those people out there who have always had no hope or faith in Intercytex I doubt ever will and will keep singing the “in 5 years” song.


#2

HT Docs like Rassman are going to have a field day with this one. mixed results. i don’t know what to make of these results. if this was going to be a cheap procedure i probably would be a little more excited but i don’t know. i expected results to be a LITTLE better than this.

i guess we will just have to wait until mid to late 2008 for the next results…because THERE ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS.

all we can do now is live and focus on trying to keep the hair we do have.


#3

» HT Docs like Rassman are going to have a field day with this one. mixed
» results. i don’t know what to make of these results. if this was going to
» be a cheap procedure i probably would be a little more excited but i don’t
» know. i expected results to be a LITTLE better than this.
»
» i guess we will just have to wait until mid to late 2008 for the next
» results…because THERE ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS.
»
» all we can do now is live and focus on trying to keep the hair we do have.

I agree. It’s nice to see some regrew hair, and one person even doubled his hair-count in the test patch. But the results are still wildly inconsistent. Then, 2/5 with the first protocol grew hair. 5/5 in the second protocol, but five people is not, to me, a telling sample.

The results seem decidedly mediocre. I really can’t believe even that they are only dealing with such small samples of people, and such few cohorts at a time. This is nothing like what many were hoping coming in to this. We’ve got a long wait ahead of us, and as Redman says, there are no other options.

Interestingly enough, I’m not sure if all of you remember, but a while ago there was a fiasco surrounding Jotronic where he posted in response to a question on HM on a transplant thread in the other forum, that he talked to somebody he knew “deep in the know” with regards to Intercytex’s procedure, who felt that it would be at least ten years before Intercytex had a marketable product. Now we know the thread was hushed up, but ironically, it doesn’t seem that far-fetched.

Since this is a financial report, and thus they will be spinning the results as best as possible, Jotronic’s mystery friend seems much closer to being accurate than any of the other so called ‘insiders’, like Nathan and TheGame, whose predictions now just seem absurd.

We’ll have a very happy 201x.


#4

» HT Docs like Rassman are going to have a field day with this one. mixed
» results. i don’t know what to make of these results. if this was going to
» be a cheap procedure i probably would be a little more excited but i don’t
» know. i expected results to be a LITTLE better than this.
»
» i guess we will just have to wait until mid to late 2008 for the next
» results…because THERE ARE NO OTHER OPTIONS.
»
» all we can do now is live and focus on trying to keep the hair we do have.

I for one am thrilled at the results. Phase II seems to be running quite successfully. At this point it seems that a acceptable product that actually works (whether it be 20%-50%) will be available to us within 3-5 years. And a complete cure in 5-10 years. Awesome!!! Remember gents, they’re only scratching the surface on this technology and they are literally creating follicles out of almost nothing.

I remember once reading posts from a few members here to save money and focus on you health and other important factors in life and I agree completely. Now excuse me while go do some stomach crunches cause baby HM is in the bag!!! :smiley:


#5

It doesn’t really mean all that much, don’t forget Rogaine claims to have 75% success rate too, ICX could be just another topical that gives some results but not really the kind of results we are looking for.


#6

The timeline is definitly not good I agree, but we are given very little options in this battle 1. DO nothing 2. Take vitamins and drugs 3. Get an HT or 4. Wear a wig. Sh*tty options to say the least but it is all we have at this time. All I can say is that HM is here and has been proven to be successful. As long as HM technology comes to market it will bring a flood of improvement in the years to follow its release. This update is one step closer to that release although a small one.


#7

I think what most people find dispiriting are not the results themselves, but the in-your-face confirmation that the work is proceeding at such a glacial pace and that even the much-disparaged “5-year” time frame may be optimistic. Even given the current results – 13 to 105% in the second group – if ICX had made a statement to the effect that “despite these less than perfect results, we are pressing ahead with commercialization and will in the imminent future be offering the procedure to those willing to accept limited results somewhere in that range,” I imagine not a few people would be encouraged by this and be happy to roll the dice and just hope they were one of the lucky ones closer to the 105% results. Even if you hit mid-range, you’d still have greater than 50% regrowth. Many people here would exult at that. But with confirmation that a rollout is still so far ahead that its not even on the horizon, and that business will simply continue as usual at the accustomed agonizingly slow rate, on tiny test groups behind the impenetrable walls of just one facility, with no competitive heat to accelerate the process, nor even any apparent sense of urgency among those conducting the research, and with only rare and vague updates of progress always w/o photographs, well, to me, that is what makes it hard to hold onto hope.


#8

I dont understand… how these are bad results? From what I read, after 24 weeks of the initial dosage they had (21 & 55%) growth – ok not bad, but the second group, injected more recently in ONLY 6 -12 Weeks they saw anything from (13-105%).

Thats a three month period tops!

Is anyone else amazed by this, or are you just skimming through the numbers waiting to read the words “miracle cure?”

When I take into consideration the timing between the two groups, it tells me that at least one person in the second group experienced TWICE the maxium results of the BEST subject in the first group in HALF the time.

Come on people, lol. This is great news. And it makes total sense when you read the first sentence “Although its too early to determine fully the difference between the sub groups” Which appropraitly should be thier primary concern, why did the second have such a winning result in half the time?

It seems to me the phrase “too early to determine fully” means they have some ideas, some theories about why it happened, but arent ready to release a statement based on thier need for further testing.

I dont know, I mean these were the kind of GOOD results I was expecting, proof that it works, and proof that by tweaking some things they can improve how well it works.

“Although it is too early to determine fully the differences between the sub-groups, the preliminary data are encouraging. In the first sub-group 2 patients out of 5 showed substantial increases in hair count (21 & 55%) at 24 weeks. In the second sub-group (5 patients in total) injected more recently,
all patients showed substantial and visible increased hair counts at 6 and/or 12 weeks (13-105%). We believe this increased hair production is attributable to the interaction between the injected DP cells and the stimulated resident hair producing cells. A further 8 subjects will be treated with variations in delivery technique. The full data set on all subjects at 24 weeks will be available in the middle of 2008. This detailed analysis will form the
basis of further Phase II or Phase III trials as appropriate.
At the end of the trial photographic data will be analysed from a much larger area of treated scalp on all subjects at 12 months. Currently 2 patients have been lost to follow up.”


#9

I don’t appreciate any major difference in expectations based on the interim results.

To me it seems that ICX is just looking for the fewest, least common denominators necessary to effect a successful and consistent protocol, which is what Phase II is all about. The first batch of Phase II was just dp cells. In the second batch they added epithelial cells. The third batch will involve another tweak (probably add something else), and if the results are still not satisfactory, they’ll tweak again, and keep on tweaking until they get a consistent and acceptable response rate and result. Hence, the uncertainty as to whether they’ll move into Phase III or do another round of Phase II next summer.

ICX appears confident about getting to Phase III–it’s a question of how they can get there taking the fewest steps possible.


#10

» I don’t appreciate any major difference in expectations based on the
» interim results.
»
» To me it seems that ICX is just looking for the fewest, least common
» denominators necessary to effect a successful and consistent protocol,
» which is what Phase II is all about. The first batch of Phase II was just
» dp cells. In the second batch they added epithelial cells. The third
» batch will involve another tweak (probably add something else), and if the
» results are still not satisfactory, they’ll tweak again, and keep on
» tweaking until they get a consistent and acceptable response rate and
» result. Hence, the uncertainty as to whether they’ll move into Phase III
» or do another round of Phase II next summer.
»
» ICX appears confident about getting to Phase III–it’s a question of how
» they can get there taking the fewest steps possible.

I am not as confident in the posted results for the same reasons that I have been skeptical about its near term release. First, the lack of consistency of regrowth is concerning to me, if one part of your head responds as they wish, but another does not, then you might have alfala sprouts arising without any level of consistency. that would look really weird and in my mind, athough the hairs that actually grew back would be cosmetically acceptable, the overall solution would not be as you would now have a balding pattern that is atypical of MPB. I am particularly interested in the pattern of hairs regrown, rather than the number that actually regrew hair. even the 103%er could have a really weird pattern of regrowth, so more is needed to truly understand.

secondly, the second cohort had addtional substances injected in order to achieve better results. if ICX determines that anything other than one’s own cells are necessary to achieve success, then they are back to Phase I because foreign substances were not part of that evaluation and it would need to be reevaluated for safety.

one more thing, as far as the term “commercialization”, I believe they are really talking about a large scale Phase III and not openly available to the public.

HM is proven as science, but many of its detractors properly point out that noone really knows who it will work on, how effective it will be and cannot guarantee a “cosmetically acceptable solution”

all and all, I still have hope, but I must say that these results cannot be viewed as positive and at the very least, the timeline has taken a pretty big hit


#11

Anything is better than what we have now, it will be a breakthrough, my only disappointment is that it is still years away. At first I thought phase 2 would only last 1 year, now even assuming that all goes well, phase 2 will last at least 1.5 years all the way to middle of 2008. If you add another 1.5 years for phase 3 and then another 6 months to prepare for the eventual commercialization, we are easily looking at 2010 and beyond. I really don’t know if I can wait that long, I am thinking of just getting fue now while waiting for this.


#12

» I am not as confident in the posted results for the same reasons that I
» have been skeptical about its near term release. First, the lack of
» consistency of regrowth is concerning to me, if one part of your head
» responds as they wish, but another does not, then you might have alfala
» sprouts arising without any level of consistency. that would look really
» weird and in my mind, athough the hairs that actually grew back would be
» cosmetically acceptable, the overall solution would not be as you would
» now have a balding pattern that is atypical of MPB. I am particularly
» interested in the pattern of hairs regrown, rather than the number that
» actually regrew hair. even the 103%er could have a really weird pattern of
» regrowth, so more is needed to truly understand.

I also seriously doubt the 2008 commercial release will come to pass–any chance of that ever happening was just an optimistic best-case-scenario, IMHO. I don’t see sectionalized “clumping” of growth as an issue though. If I had to guess, based on everything I’ve read by the more knowledgeable posters here, the areas that are less likely to respond are the areas that have been bald the longest, so you’d still have a pattern of loss in the areas that didn’t respond.

Which leads to another point. These interim results are based on just one session. It’s been suggested by a number of posters (including, but not limited to TheGame) that repeat procedures would likely be necessary, depending on how long a person has been bald. If, worst case scenario, one session yields 13% regrowth, and you go back 3-4 more times, you’ll have enough for a cosmetically acceptable appearing full head of hair (yeah, I know–it’ll cost more). This supposes that repeat procedures will produce additional growth at the same rate as the first time.

If I had to guess (which is all I am, or pretty much anyone here is doing right now), I’d say the 105%-er was the youngest guy in the batch.

»
» secondly, the second cohort had addtional substances injected in order to
» achieve better results. if ICX determines that anything other than one’s
» own cells are necessary to achieve success, then they are back to Phase I
» because foreign substances were not part of that evaluation and it would
» need to be reevaluated for safety.
»

Good point. I mentioned they added epithelial cells–they actually stimulated them (no idea how) in the second cohort, but probably by adding something to the solution. I was under the impression, however, that they had to test something other than one’s own cells in Phase I. I thought this was the whole point of why having a propriety step in the process required them to go through this testing, which would not have been necessary but for the fact that the proprietary step in the process involved a foreign substance. So as long as they didn’t introduce any new foreign substances into the procedure, they would be fine testing out whatever kind of autologous cells they needed to.

» one more thing, as far as the term “commercialization”, I believe they are
» really talking about a large scale Phase III and not openly available to
» the public.
»
» HM is proven as science, but many of its detractors properly point out
» that noone really knows who it will work on, how effective it will be and
» cannot guarantee a “cosmetically acceptable solution”

I agree to an extent, but I think the fact that a relatively small sampling pool has been used by ICX inidicates that there is a very high level of predictability among human beings with respect to consistency of cellular properties.

»
» all and all, I still have hope, but I must say that these results cannot
» be viewed as positive and at the very least, the timeline has taken a
» pretty big hit

I don’t think the results are bad at all. Remember, the second cohort figures are based on a twelve-week interval, which was a vast improvement over the first cohort. Guys who have entire follicles transplanted need up to 12 months to fully appreciate their results. The fact that timeline got pushed back again is annoying, but who is really surprised about that? We’re all on notice about delays–it’d be a huge miscalculation not to expect them at this point…

Best Regards,


#13

n/t