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

New ICX patent -In vitro hair follicle formation


#1

http://v3.espacenet.com/publicationDetails/biblio?CC=EP&NR=2007879A2&KC=A2&FT=D&date=20081231&DB=EPODOC&locale=en_EP

Why would they go to a whole new approach if they believed icx-trc will work? They even say in the new patent that “An alternative to hair follicle transplantation is follicular cell implantation but at present no clinical application of follicular cell implantation is available”


#2

I would make a fortune off the hair-biz.


#3

People, read the patent, don’t follow the first man that write here, and after repeat the same opinions of him. This is not shi*, personally seems to be realtistic, and more easy than a cellular injection. From the patent:
This invention addresses one of the problems of current hair transplantation techniques that there is a limit to the available donor hair. The total number of human scalp hairs is fixed after birth. Similarly the donor hair source for an Alopecia patient is restricted. As hair transplantation does not create any new hair, it simply transfer hairs from one location to another, there is a need for a method of producing further hairs.

It is not necessary for the hair follicle to be fully formed in order for it to develop into a mature hair when transplanted. Surprisingly, we have found that a partially formed follicle structure (proto-hair) generated in vitro will also develop into a mature hair when transplanted.

This invention dramatically decreases the quantity of donor hair tissue required. It has the potential to provide an infinite number of hair follicles or proto-hairs from the cells originally isolated from a few hair follicles, since the cells can be infinitively expanded in vitro.
It’s a personal opinion, but i think that this will be incredible if they can do the procedure in the next 2 years.
Especially, this can resolve the hypotetic problem about the lobby’s of doctors against the research about studies that can take off them from this work… think about this too…


#4

» It’s a personal opinion, but i think that this will be incredible if they
» can do the procedure in the next 2 years.
» Especially, this can resolve the hypotetic problem about the lobby’s of
» doctors against the research about studies that can take off them from this
» work… think about this too…

You’d be lucky to get a photo from Intercytex in 2 years let alone a full-fledged cure. In vitro formation is a good idea…


#5

LOL…btw, nice signature!


#6

ICX-TRC has never been supported by enough public evidence for me to believe it does anything beyond the dermabrasion effects.

ICX the company has proven even less about anything else for hair.

The main reason ICX was ever originally viewed as a strong HM contender was because they were spending real money on clinical trials for the TRC process. Which is not the same thing as having real decent published results.

Now they’ve basically stopped spending the money on it too. That leaves essentially nothing real to signal they’re going anywhere with developing MPB treatments.


#7

» ICX-TRC has never been supported by enough public evidence for me to
» believe it does anything beyond the dermabrasion effects.
»
» ICX the company has proven even less about anything else for hair.
»
»
»
» The main reason ICX was ever originally viewed as a strong HM contender
» was because they were spending real money on clinical trials for the TRC
» process. Which is not the same thing as having real decent published
» results.
»
» Now they’ve basically stopped spending the money on it too. That leaves
» essentially nothing real to signal they’re going anywhere with developing
» MPB treatments.

ICX claimed they would eventually be able to implant “foreign” cells into a person’s scalp. (Remember the allogenic v. autologous procedure discussions?) In some respects, (at least theoretically) this could be a superior procedure to the TRC, but I suspect, more arduous to figure out how to successfully acheive, let alone implement on a massive scale (and remember, they have not shown any indication that TRC–the easier procedure–even works satisfactorily).

Since TRC seems to have stalled, they probably just filed the patent to sit on the patent rights, which would enable them to sell the rights or sue for infringement if someone else figures out how to implement what they couldn’t.

Unless the follica DIY guys report success, our scalps will continue to shine in '09.


#8

» The main reason ICX was ever originally viewed as a strong HM contender
» was because they were spending real money on clinical trials for the TRC
» process.

yes, but very little money, and very few trialists.
Just compare with the ongoing ARI trials. Bald-HalfTruthsays they want 100 volunteers. I don’t know if there will be 100 trialists, but anyway it seems that they are going to test it on a decent number of trialists.

Which is not the same thing as having real decent published
» results.
»
» Now they’ve basically stopped spending the money on it too. That leaves
» essentially nothing real to signal they’re going anywhere with developing
» MPB treatments.

they said that they intended to sell TRC to another company who would want to continue the TRC trials, but now they file a patent about protohairs, that somewhat overlooks or disregards the cell injections (TRC).
Total lack of logic.


#9

I think that only person lacking logic is you dude :slight_smile:

Issuing a patent is always a good idea. Especialy when there is yet no available treatment that actually works.

I dont see anything weird about it, they investigate cell regeneration, and probably one of the byproducts of this research were the protohairs.


#10

if it works! then go for it intercytex, i don’t understand why it takes so much between the discovery and the application? they said that it’s working, come on bring us the product!


#11

» I think that only person lacking logic is you dude :slight_smile:
»
» Issuing a patent is always a good idea. Especialy when there is yet no
» available treatment that actually works.
»
» I dont see anything weird about it, they investigate cell regeneration,
» and probably one of the byproducts of this research were the protohairs.

<>


#12

The amount of professionalism Intercytex has displayed is profound. It is true that they have been very secretive but i dont think there is amything wrong with that nor is there anything wrong with applying for patents in other areas of hair regeneration.

I think the exisiting patent refers to this -

http://www.intercytex.com/icx/investors/rep/rep2008/2008-09-18/2008-08-19.pdf

Scroll to the bottom of page 30 Where they say 2 approaches. The patent refers to the latter.


#13

It is if you’re publicly traded.


#14

» The amount of professionalism Intercytex has displayed is profound. It is
» true that they have been very secretive but i dont think there is amything
» wrong with that nor is there anything wrong with applying for patents in
» other areas of hair regeneration.
»
» I think the exisiting patent refers to this -
»
»
»
» http://www.intercytex.com/icx/investors/rep/rep2008/2008-09-18/2008-08-19.pdf
»
» Scroll to the bottom of page 30 Where they say 2 approaches. The patent
» refers to the latter.

Thanks nathan I knew I’d seem it somewhere,But its still only damned preclinical.I’d been searching,but couldn’t find it.

Two approaches

Inject DP cells alone to promote existing epidermal cells to grow new hair – Phase II trials

Use DP cells to make “protohairs” in vitro and then implant - Preclinical


#15

IMO intercyrex will make an anouncement in mid to late 2010


#16

I used to phone the Farjo Clinic when they wanted trialist,more to do with asking questions to them,occassionally I’d get a good responce.It might of been talk the talk,but at least wait until March update.

Why doesn’t someone phone Intercytex,you might just be surprized how open they might be.No I’m not doing it!

ROLL ON HM!


#17

I’m not sure, but i think that this procedure don’t need trials, for sure don’t need trial for safety, maybe only one, for the efficacy. I say this because all the process, is out from the body of the person. The cells duplication and growth, is in vitro, so no problems for the skin. The product of the technique, the hair, is the same of the human hair, so is not dangerous.

TRC was an injection of cells between other cells, so a study was necessary to see if something could change and make problems…
But with a proto hair is a normal transplant, so i think the only study required is to see if the hair grow up like the others!!


#18

» I’m not sure, but i think that this procedure don’t need trials, for sure
» don’t need trial for safety, maybe only one, for the efficacy. I say this
» because all the process, is out from the body of the person. The cells
» duplication and growth, is in vitro, so no problems for the skin. The
» product of the technique, the hair, is the same of the human hair, so is
» not dangerous.
»
» TRC was an injection of cells between other cells, so a study was
» necessary to see if something could change and make problems…
» But with a proto hair is a normal transplant, so i think the only study
» required is to see if the hair grow up like the others!!

My fellow SPQR, there’s always need a trial!that’s the problem!


#19

» » I’m not sure, but i think that this procedure don’t need trials, for
» sure
» » don’t need trial for safety, maybe only one, for the efficacy. I say
» this
» » because all the process, is out from the body of the person. The cells
» » duplication and growth, is in vitro, so no problems for the skin. The
» » product of the technique, the hair, is the same of the human hair, so
» is
» » not dangerous.
» »
» » TRC was an injection of cells between other cells, so a study was
» » necessary to see if something could change and make problems…
» » But with a proto hair is a normal transplant, so i think the only study
» » required is to see if the hair grow up like the others!!
»
» My fellow SPQR, there’s always need a trial!that’s the problem!
italiano o romano?:smiley:


#20

» » » I’m not sure, but i think that this procedure don’t need trials, for
» » sure
» » » don’t need trial for safety, maybe only one, for the efficacy. I say
» » this
» » » because all the process, is out from the body of the person. The
» cells
» » » duplication and growth, is in vitro, so no problems for the skin. The
» » » product of the technique, the hair, is the same of the human hair, so
» » is
» » » not dangerous.
» » »
» » » TRC was an injection of cells between other cells, so a study was
» » » necessary to see if something could change and make problems…
» » » But with a proto hair is a normal transplant, so i think the only
» study
» » » required is to see if the hair grow up like the others!!
» »
» » My fellow SPQR, there’s always need a trial!that’s the problem!
» italiano o romano?:smiley:
well i would say citizens of the international hair society :wink: