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

Intercytex TRC Trial Patients


#1

With all this talk about Intercytex-TRC of late got me thinking.

The test patients for TRC are obviously suffering from MPB, but does any one wonder if any of those who have already undergone TRC in trial form visit this hair loss board and/or others?

I think it would be fantastic if we could have some input from one of the test subject on how things are going for that particular person like what was the rate of loss? what regrowth they have had? and how many injections received? among other things.

I assume they will be under some kind of contract that disallows them from disclosing such information but I think it would be great to have a conversation with one of these people. They could quite easily speak out anonymously.

I know we are supposed to be getting an update on the 18th but what if they give out general percentages again? does any one know what information they are likely going to provide?

Is anyone reading this a test subject or knows one? I’d like to hear from you! :smiley:


#2

Well I think icx made sure no one will say anything. They surely were given NDA to sign.


#3

» Well I think icx made sure no one will say anything. They surely were given
» NDA to sign.

Sadly I think your right about the Non-Disclosure agreement.
What if one of the trialists’ were to break it?
How would Intercytex know who the person was if no specific information was given?

Surely they wouldn’t exclude all current trialists’ if one person was to give a small amount of information would they?
It would be a major set back if they did, so It would probably be to risky in terms of the length of the current trial.

I do fear though that the only information we are going to get is going to be some vague details directly from Intercytex, though it would be interesting to hear from someone that already has had a procedure.


#4

» » Well I think icx made sure no one will say anything. They surely were
» given
» » NDA to sign.
»
» Sadly I think your right about the Non-Disclosure agreement.
» What if one of the trialists’ were to break it?
» How would Intercytex know who the person was if no specific information
» was given?
»
» Surely they wouldn’t exclude all current trialists’ if one person was to
» give a small amount of information would they?
» It would be a major set back if they did, so It would probably be to risky
» in terms of the length of the current trial.
»
» I do fear though that the only information we are going to get is going to
» be some vague details directly from Intercytex, though it would be
» interesting to hear from someone that already has had a procedure.

Non disclosure and are some trial patients placebo controlled group? They wouldn’t know whether they are getting the REAL deal or not.


#5

» » » Well I think icx made sure no one will say anything. They surely were
» » given
» » » NDA to sign.
» »
» » Sadly I think your right about the Non-Disclosure agreement.
» » What if one of the trialists’ were to break it?
» » How would Intercytex know who the person was if no specific information
» » was given?
» »
» » Surely they wouldn’t exclude all current trialists’ if one person was
» to
» » give a small amount of information would they?
» » It would be a major set back if they did, so It would probably be to
» risky
» » in terms of the length of the current trial.
» »
» » I do fear though that the only information we are going to get is going
» to
» » be some vague details directly from Intercytex, though it would be
» » interesting to hear from someone that already has had a procedure.
»
» Non disclosure and are some trial patients placebo controlled group? They
» wouldn’t know whether they are getting the REAL deal or not.

Good point, I seemed have over looked that one but looking into it further I don’t think the trial for ICX-TRC involves any placebo controlled group. correct me if I’m wrong.


#6

» » » » Well I think icx made sure no one will say anything. They surely
» were
» » » given
» » » » NDA to sign.
» » »
» » » Sadly I think your right about the Non-Disclosure agreement.
» » » What if one of the trialists’ were to break it?
» » » How would Intercytex know who the person was if no specific
» information
» » » was given?
» » »
» » » Surely they wouldn’t exclude all current trialists’ if one person was
» » to
» » » give a small amount of information would they?
» » » It would be a major set back if they did, so It would probably be to
» » risky
» » » in terms of the length of the current trial.
» » »
» » » I do fear though that the only information we are going to get is
» going
» » to
» » » be some vague details directly from Intercytex, though it would be
» » » interesting to hear from someone that already has had a procedure.
» »
» » Non disclosure and are some trial patients placebo controlled group?
» They
» » wouldn’t know whether they are getting the REAL deal or not.
»
» Good point, I seemed have over looked that one but looking into it further
» I don’t think the trial for ICX-TRC involves any placebo controlled group.
» correct me if I’m wrong.

And that’s not the only problem mate!

let’s suppose that one of the tiralist were to disclose (under Anonymity) some pieces of information regarding the treatment. You’ll find that most of us will immediately reject or put into question his/her claims and ask for some kind of proof or evidence to back them up.

It’s pointless.

I hope I’m wrong but it seems very unlikely that they are about to announce particularly good news. If that was the case, in one way or another, the ‘market’ would have already given out indications and important signals that something was ‘on’.


#7

» » » » » Well I think icx made sure no one will say anything. They surely
» » were
» » » » given
» » » » » NDA to sign.
» » » »
» » » » Sadly I think your right about the Non-Disclosure agreement.
» » » » What if one of the trialists’ were to break it?
» » » » How would Intercytex know who the person was if no specific
» » information
» » » » was given?
» » » »
» » » » Surely they wouldn’t exclude all current trialists’ if one person
» was
» » » to
» » » » give a small amount of information would they?
» » » » It would be a major set back if they did, so It would probably be
» to
» » » risky
» » » » in terms of the length of the current trial.
» » » »
» » » » I do fear though that the only information we are going to get is
» » going
» » » to
» » » » be some vague details directly from Intercytex, though it would be
» » » » interesting to hear from someone that already has had a procedure.
» » »
» » » Non disclosure and are some trial patients placebo controlled group?
» » They
» » » wouldn’t know whether they are getting the REAL deal or not.
» »
» » Good point, I seemed have over looked that one but looking into it
» further
» » I don’t think the trial for ICX-TRC involves any placebo controlled
» group.
» » correct me if I’m wrong.
»
»
» And that’s not the only problem mate!
»
» let’s suppose that one of the tiralist were to disclose (under Anonymity)
» some pieces of information regarding the treatment. You’ll find that most
» of us will immediately reject or put into question his/her claims and ask
» for some kind of proof or evidence to back them up.
»
»
» It’s pointless.
»
» I hope I’m wrong but it seems very unlikely that they are about to
» announce particularly good news. If that was the case, in one way or
» another, the ‘market’ would have already given out indications and
» important signals that something was ‘on’.

I know what you mean, it would be a case of ‘Ill believe it when I see it’.

I do hope your wrong though about not getting any good news. The way I see it things would have to improve if only slightly, after all that is their aim on this trial and they may have improved the delivery technique etc.

I’m not sure what you mean though when you say “the ‘market’ would have already given out indications and important signals that something was 'on”. Do you mean the stock prices would have risen significantly or some people more in the ‘know’ about ICX may give out indication of significant improvement, or am I missing your point?


#8

We all know what will probably happen.

The update will be another small step forwards, but nothing pretty to look at and no earth-shatteringly effective stats.

And then the wailing will begin: “ICX is a fraud! HM is still decades away! They know it’s nowhere near working but they’re keeping us in the dark!”

And then we’ll eventually settle down for another year or two.

The expectations for that next update will gradually build up just as unrealistically high as they were for this one.


#9

» We all know what will probably happen.
»
» The update will be another small step forwards, but nothing pretty to look
» at and no earth-shatteringly effective stats.
»
» And then the wailing will begin: “ICX is a fraud! HM is still decades
» away! They know it’s nowhere near working but they’re keeping us in the
» dark!”
»
»
»
» And then we’ll eventually settle down for another year or two.
»
» The expectations for that next update will gradually build up just as
» unrealistically high as they were for this one.

Are you kidding me? Haven’t they already signed a contract with another company which will allow faster procedures with the use of a machine/robot. That should be a well enough of a sign to let us predict that good news is to come.


#10

» » We all know what will probably happen.
» »
» » The update will be another small step forwards, but nothing pretty to
» look
» » at and no earth-shatteringly effective stats.
» »
» » And then the wailing will begin: “ICX is a fraud! HM is still decades
» » away! They know it’s nowhere near working but they’re keeping us in
» the
» » dark!”
» »
» »
» »
» » And then we’ll eventually settle down for another year or two.
» »
» » The expectations for that next update will gradually build up just as
» » unrealistically high as they were for this one.
»
»
»
»
» Are you kidding me? Haven’t they already signed a contract with another
» company which will allow faster procedures with the use of a
» machine/robot. That should be a well enough of a sign to let us predict
» that good news is to come.

I agree, but i think the problem is people are expecting TRC to be more than what it is going to be.

people are under the impression it will be a miracle cure and will give a full head of hair straight off.
I think ICX are planning a release even if it only gives moderate regrowth.


#11

TheOne:
I agree, but i think the problem is people are expecting TRC to be more than what it is going to be.

people are under the impression it will be a miracle cure and will give a full head of hair straight off.
I think ICX are planning a release even if it only gives moderate regrowth.

Truth be told, none of the current hair treatments offer a 100% effective solution to MPB, so why should HM be any different? HM is in its early stages, but at least it’s a step in the right direction.

.


#12

» Do you mean the stock prices would have risen significantly or some
» people more in the ‘know’ about ICX may give out indication of significant
» improvement, or am I missing your point?

That’s exactly what I meant. Most of the times stocks inflate or deflate because of insider knowledge about the prospective growth of a company.


#13

Exactly Piperz, if they had some solid good news, their stock would be showing it. There is always insider knowledge at these companies. I am gonna go out on a limb and say they will report good results so far, all patients ok, but no specifics, and no pics, and will continue phase 2 til end of year. translation - We will be bald for 5 more years


#14

» Exactly Piperz, if they had some solid good news, their stock would be
» showing it. There is always insider knowledge at these companies. I am
» gonna go out on a limb and say they will report good results so far, all
» patients ok, but no specifics, and no pics, and will continue phase 2 til
» end of year. translation - We will be bald for 5 more years and the research money will keep flowing.


#15

» Exactly Piperz, if they had some solid good news, their stock would be
» showing it. There is always insider knowledge at these companies. I am
» gonna go out on a limb and say they will report good results so far, all
» patients ok, but no specifics, and no pics, and will continue phase 2 til
» end of year. translation - We will be bald for 5 more years,

Maybe so, but it its ICX’s best interest to release as soon as they possibly can so they can start making a profit off of the millions of follicly challenged individuals in the world, even if it is marginally effective.

After all it is possible they will be facing competition from the likes of Follica in the next few years.
If Follica were to introduce an effective treatment before TRC comes to market that would be a devastating blow for Intercytex.


#16

» » Exactly Piperz, if they had some solid good news, their stock would be
» » showing it. There is always insider knowledge at these companies. I am
» » gonna go out on a limb and say they will report good results so far,
» all
» » patients ok, but no specifics, and no pics, and will continue phase 2
» til
» » end of year. translation - We will be bald for 5 more years,
»
» Maybe so, but it its ICX’s best interest to release as soon as they
» possibly can so they can start making a profit off of the millions of
» follicly challenged individuals in the world, even if it is marginally
» effective.
»
» After all it is possible they will be facing competition from the likes of
» Follica in the next few years.
» If Follica were to introduce an effective treatment before TRC comes to
» market that would be a devastating blow for Intercytex.

The stock would not take off on anything less than a statement pronouncing a cure for baldness. Even if they achieved that, ICX could not make that claim coming out of a Phase II trial, no matter how well it went. So, the lack of a stock bounce means nothing.

It cuts both ways, though; as it is a phase II trial, don’t expect any ground breaking announcement from them. Really, its going to take a good year to really get a clear picture of how this technology is going to break.

Personally, I think Follica will beat them, both to market and quality of product. They are way more confident in their tech, and they have far more credible researchers.


#17

I just wish ICX would give us a clear answer on the question in the back of all our minds:

Can’t the TRC procedure just be done repeatedly, over & over again in the same areas of the scalp, until we eventually accumulate enough regrowth to cosmetically restore most of our heads that way?

All this cautioning about the “limited effectiveness of the first generation,” but never an answer to the simple question that immediately occurs after hearing it.


#18

Has Follica even been tried on humans yet? I thought they had only done experiments in mice. If they haven’t completed a phase I trial yet, I don’t know how they would beat ICX to market, unless ICX is a total bust. If they have tried it on humans, could you post a link?


#19

» Has Follica even been tried on humans yet? I thought they had only done
» experiments in mice. If they haven’t completed a phase I trial yet, I
» don’t know how they would beat ICX to market, unless ICX is a total bust.
» If they have tried it on humans, could you post a link?

I have a question also. Why are people saying that Aderans is so far behind in terms of a product? It is on this website under news where Dr. Wasehik talks about Aderans Hair Multiplication research on CNBC Donny Deutsch’s Big Idea TV show. In the video he cleary states a product will be out by then end of 2009 or soon after.


#20

dave21:
I have a question also. Why are people saying that Aderans is so far behind in terms of a product? It is on this website under news where Dr. Wasehik talks about Aderans Hair Multiplication research on CNBC Donny Deutsch’s Big Idea TV show. In the video he cleary states a product will be out by then end of 2009 or soon after.

That’s because Dr. Wasehik is an accomplished liar. In a recent article he stated:

Washenik said he once predicted a treatment would be ready in five years. “But at this point I think it’s better not to make an estimate because I’m really not sure,” he said.

.