New News? Angela Christiano

Stem cell; cell based hair therapy
81

The fact that he combined “off-the-shelf” components to prove that - in their combination - they are able to culture cells, implant them and create brand new hair is in itself novel.

the scientists at CERN did not reinvent the wheel to prove the existence of the higgs-boson. Instead they used their age-old particle accelerators and a combination of a multitude of known techniques to achieve their goal. How does applying known science to achieve a result diminish the value of the same.

I really have to ask myself why you are trolling this issue so heavily.

[quote]
I think what many here don’t realize is Jahoda is simply using off-the-shelve components and ideas. As I have stated before, nothing he has done here is novel.[/quote]

82

Roger,

Spoke to washniek at ishrs.

They were culturing the epithelial and dermal components of the follicle separately and injecting them separately.

Niether they were culturing in 3d spheroids nor they were using growth factors specifically to activate dp/ds cells like shh,wnt .etc.

Will ask him about the progenitor cd200+ culturing used by them or not in the jigami process.

James is not understanding that replicell used dcs cell cultures…
and on his wife jahoda used non cultured freshly isolated ds cells which had not yet lost its trichogenicity.

James try to understand,researchers do not fail,but their study makes others to move closure to solutions…every experiment, gives some conclusion on a hypothesis.Negative or positive both are enlightening.

While replicell used cultured dcs cells…which definitely would have lost it’s partial trichogenicity…hence replicell got partial success.

I got this clue about the freshly isolated dp or ds cells…and their trichogenic potential from jahoda…
We have gone one step ahead…from jahoda ,
regards experimenting with fresh trichogenic dp/ds cells…by adding certain specific gf/shh, to activate or make ds/dp cells trichogenic…

can’t disclose much about it…but in our first test …we can see thick terminal neofollicles on human scalp ,in 1sqcm area on the vertex of a patient in six weeks…
i do have the pics for the same…but this time cannot disclose much ,till we file patent for the same…and repeat this protocol as a miniclinical trial.

Well arashi, you will be proved wrong…we will improve on these researchers finding…not just replicate …
as we have a more holistic approach…a team based approach with feedback and work of different lab researchers from across the globe…with regulatory advantage .
My effort is to get researchers , who are working with different approaches for follicle neogenesis,to share and suggest,utilize each others advantage…

Jahoda used hanging drop method to culture in 3d…
we will shortly use polysterene coated low adherent tubes for 3d aggregation…for mass production of 3d spheroids…so that we can inject the cells without dissociation.

We will use important gf to make the ds/dp cellsmore trichogenic.
Ans with the help of jahoda,gerd, many others and with our own insights…a good culture protocol will do the trick…to maintain the conductivity of dp/ds cells…

Dear james…i believe the creation of spheroidal dp or ds cell(and injecting as 3d spheroids and not dissocaited cells,which we and jahoda are doing now)

with secretion of natural ecm…or a microfollicle created by gerd…is definitely the next thing to focus…
plus the use of freshly isolated trichogenic dp/ds cells with addition of gf or shh…to make dp/ds cells trichogenic and activated to be able to induce neofollicle formation…
plus the right culture protocol to induce these cells to produce hair …
is not old news…not to be excited about.

Me and mwamba were approached by a lot of surgeons,regarding doubling and HM work…

we are finalising our study protocol in next 15 days…as per the requirenment of fue research committee of ishrs…headed by dr mohibe.

and would probably start the clinical study for documentation and peer review presentation when we meet again in mumbai on 20th november.

Tom is with me… a lot of ht surgeons had a look at his donor ,without white dots,regen of bisected hair on his temples and hair line…

Today is jahoda;s lecture…will be asking him questions…focused around dp/ds cells and .
Rest are regular fut,fue sessions lectures in ishrs…
Nevertheless,meeting fellow collegues,
first time… with many of them…is a good experience.

83

can’t disclose much about it…but in our first test …we can see thick terminal neofollicles on human scalp ,in 1sqcm area on the vertex of a patient in six weeks…
i do have the pics for the same…but this time cannot disclose much ,till we file patent for the same…and repeat this protocol as a miniclinical trial.

Sounds good man, I hope the patent does not slow things up too much.

Do you have a protocall to determine if these are new follicles or rejuvenated ones?

84

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by James Bond[/postedby]
Aderans was intimately familiar with the clumping problem (which is why they hired Tom Barrows). They experimented with 3d matrices, cultured clumping techniques, etc for about 10 years. [/quote]

Do you have a link for this info? I’ve never seen evidence that ARI tried aggregating these cells.

85

That’s exactly right, Dr. Nigam. That’s the right outlook for scientists and the public. The scientific method means always building on past learning, and moving advances incrementally, step by step. Thank you for all this great information from the conference, Dr. Nigam!

86

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by James Bond[/postedby]
Aderans was intimately familiar with the clumping problem (which is why they hired Tom Barrows). They experimented with 3d matrices, cultured clumping techniques, etc for about 10 years.

[postedby]Originally Posted by Aran Linvail[/postedby]

Do you have a link for this info? I’ve never seen evidence that ARI tried aggregating these cells.[/quote]

As I recall, in the 2001 (?) study by Dr. Barrows, which was presented a conference in Switzerland, DP cells were implanted “behind the ear” in about 10 test subjects, and some of them grew “new” hairs.

But I don’t recall that it was ever confirmed that the hairs were actual de novo follicles (neogenesis), or just vellus follicles that had been enlarged. Also, I’m not sure what the exact location of the grafts was. “Behind the ear” could mean a lot of things. Was it on hairy scalp skin posterior to the pinna (exterior part of the ear)? Or was it actually on the non-hairy skin on the back side of the pinna? (Of course, that area is not actually completely hairless, either; there are tiny vellus follicles there that in some people, particularly older men, enlarge with age.)

I also don’t know what Barrows’ culturing technique was, or if the cells were fresh isolated and not cultured.

Since it was never expressly confirmed that experiments like this were creating de novo follicles, I think it was correct for Jahoda and Christiano to make the claim regarding their 2013 study. There is no way anyone can say that they might have just been enlarging miniaturized follicles, because the substrate was human foreskin tissue.

87

Indeed, can anyone post the study? I’d like to see evidence that they were building spheroids.

88

But Roger_that wouldn’t you be better off enlarging miniaturized follicles than creating new follicles? It seems to me that you are better off using the existing shrunken follicles because then you get the right sized shafts and the angle and direction are the same as they were before hair loss started.

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by James Bond[/postedby]
Aderans was intimately familiar with the clumping problem (which is why they hired Tom Barrows). They experimented with 3d matrices, cultured clumping techniques, etc for about 10 years.

[postedby]Originally Posted by Aran Linvail[/postedby]

Do you have a link for this info? I’ve never seen evidence that ARI tried aggregating these cells.

[postedby]Originally Posted by roger_that[/postedby]

As I recall, in the 2001 (?) study by Dr. Barrows, which was presented a conference in Switzerland, DP cells were implanted “behind the ear” in about 10 test subjects, and some of them grew “new” hairs.

But I don’t recall that it was ever confirmed that the hairs were actual de novo follicles (neogenesis), or just vellus follicles that had been enlarged. Also, I’m not sure what the exact location of the grafts was. “Behind the ear” could mean a lot of things. Was it on hairy scalp skin posterior to the pinna (exterior part of the ear)? Or was it actually on the non-hairy skin on the back side of the pinna? (Of course, that area is not actually completely hairless, either; there are tiny vellus follicles there that in some people, particularly older men, enlarge with age.)

I also don’t know what Barrows’ culturing technique was, or if the cells were fresh isolated and not cultured.

Since it was never expressly confirmed that experiments like this were creating de novo follicles, I think it was correct for Jahoda and Christiano to make the claim regarding their 2013 study. There is no way anyone can say that they might have just been enlarging miniaturized follicles, because the substrate was human foreskin tissue.[/quote]

89

I did a little research and it looks like Dr. Tom Barrows left ARI in 2008, to found a new company, Cell Constructs, Inc., in Atlanta. The mission of Cell Constructs is to develop stem cell applications to heal chronic wounds (nothing to do with hair).

Watch out on that site, though – I get a Norton virus warning.

Cell Constructs also has an active Facebook page:

On the page they call themselves a “privately funded R&D start-up venture”.

There’s also an interview online, published on the Bosley site, Dr. Washenik said the follicles grown by Barrows (which he presented in Switzerland) were de novo, neogenic follicles.

Google Bosley + Barrows + Washenik

But we know that the most recent statements by Washenik about ARI’s technology was explicitly that they were not growing new hairs, but only reviving miniaturized follicles.

We also know that early on, ARI was talking a lot about using matrices and scaffolds, and then at some point, all that talk stopped.

Connecting the dots, I would guess that possibly Dr. Barrows had differences or a falling out with Aderans, and quit, taking his scaffold technology and clumping ideas with him.

It’s also possible that their version of the “clumping” and “cell aggregates” just wasn’t working.

Whatever the reasons, if it didn’t work out, when there’s discord or an unhappy split within a company, they never announce that to the public.

After Barrows left, ARI may have gone back to a purely dissociated cells approach.

90

Not necessarily. Look at it this way – all efforts to enlarge miniaturized follicles have stalled – including ARI, which put a huge amount of money into just that, and ended up only being able to enlarge small numbers of follicles. Sticking with that model alone may be a dead end.

It may not be either/or anyway.

It may be that procedures which grow de novo follicles can also enlarge miniaturized or vellus follicles, but not vice-versa. Procedures like ARI’s which can enlarge some miniaturized follicles can’t grow new ones, unless something else is done, like culturing 3D spheroids, adding growth factors, etc.

91

I believe Barrow was the gentleman who first did the experiments on cell culturing that led ARI to drive deep into the HM field. I don’t think he’s involved in this anymore.

92

[quote][postedby]Originally Posted by Aran Linvail[/postedby]
I believe Barrow was the gentleman who first did the experiments on cell culturing that led ARI to drive deep into the HM field. I don’t think he’s involved in this anymore.[/quote]

Right, he’s not.

93

James Bond, Please post more frequently. Great insight, analysis–and with actual citations.

94

[quote] I assure you that’s not novel. They also argue it’s novel because he used drop culturing techniques. As you can see in the following study, although it’s not his invention, he did this previously in 2010. I think a similar technique was done as early as 2003.

http://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/j.1600-0625.2009.01007.x/full

Jahoda’s article is intended to hype his research in the media and generate notoriety and research funding. Look, I’m glad he’s doing this research, because too little is currently being done. I’m just trying to point out, there is a lot of hype surrounding this study, and as far as I’m concerned, I’ve seen everything that’s being done in this study done before.[/quote]

The difference between Jahoda’s 2010 study which you posted here, and the 2013 study, is that in 2013, he actually grew new hair. No hair was grown in the 2010 study, only formation of DP spheres. So to me, this is progress. It’s a major breakthrough that shows new, functional hair follicles can be generated in human skin. Of course, it will need to be tweaked significantly to get bigger, more robust follicles, but this is a milestone proof-of-concept.