Aclaris Therapeutics Announces “positive” 6 Month Results Of Phase 2 Androgenetic Alopecia Trial

BalderBaldyBald

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,132
This cannot be stated clearer:

They have stated, on many occasions, that they are researching future compounds for the treatment.

It will also not be just minoxidil at launch. Their materials have shown that there at least two compounds, to be used at different times. Name me a compound right now that is proven to be more effective at growing hair than minoxidil anyway?

You're literally bitching about them using proven stuff.



and there is yet to be anything shown to be more effective than the Dhurat study short of hair multiplication, so what the actual f*** are you bitching about?

This is just another excuse to be a whiny f*****.

It doesn't actually matter what they use or do, as long as it works to provide cosmetically-desirable results.

We know that wounding can do that, but for some reason, you're being a b**ch about a treatment utilizing said approach, with pretty much all of the experts in that field attached to the project, which has more research into it that field than literally anyone else by this point...and you're doing so in a thread about an obviously-failed drug.



There are not "many" clamoring for that at all outside of these forums, the bulk of this community are complete whackjobs, and again: market research proves this.

Lel, future compounds and yet no new patent except from mixtures of existing treatments.
I know about their so-called future plans, i can read just like you did and spill it out like a good Cots cocksucker you are, but that makes you just like me, someone who don't know sh*t about their project state on that matter, they just make one annoncement without any data on that particular point, just theories and development axis for "future" compounds and yet you're talking like it's gonna be out next year, get your sh*t together.

Current pipeline is just for this glorified wounding and growth factors you're swallowing like your good ol' uncles semen back in the days.

You're way too optimistic as always, get back here on your 14th year of finasteride, maybe you'll see things differently.
And about the market, lel, hair restoration procedures are still 70% of it.

The bulk of this community (i'll say all this community) is actually here because they care, others (non whiny faggots yourself excluded) just go bald and don't give a god damn fucks about all this, nor treatments.

So if you take this as a sample of people who actually care about going bald, you can get some hints about your market analysis, bad press and misinformation.

Propecia did not make Merck rich, now finasteride is cheap as f***, again this was considered as a commercial failure
 

HairlossCurse

Member
Reaction score
39
These results are better than you guys are giving them credit for, it is close to matching 5% Minoxidil : https://dravram.typepad.com/files/minoxidil-104-week-trial-frontal-and-vertex.pdf
In this paper after two years (not 26 weeks!) the much more potent minoxidil only grew 7-10 hairs per cm^2.

This is a low dosage experimental drug, we should be more excited about this, if you read the literature and interviews with Christiano you will see that the drug must be applied at high concentrations directly to the follicle for best results - hence why pill form does not work for Androgenetic Alopecia. It has the ability to move follicles from resting to growing phase in very powerful way, this is exactly what our resting bald heads need! (Androgenetic Alopecia hairs are stuck in resting phase)

Secondly, the TAHC of 5 or so hairs that is presented in the data is compared to a original patient, some studies will compare to placebo, that might lose 5 hairs, so total difference of 10 hairs. Which can be misleading, at least these guys are honest with their photos and data. Just think about how hard it would actually be to accurately count the difference in hairs, I bet more dodgy companies overcount as well.

I mean, is this not a good result for a low dose drug?

Aclaris-JAK-Inhibitor-Before-After-Male.jpg
 

HairSuit

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
285
These results are better than you guys are giving them credit for, it is close to matching 5% Minoxidil : https://dravram.typepad.com/files/minoxidil-104-week-trial-frontal-and-vertex.pdf
In this paper after two years (not 26 weeks!) the much more potent minoxidil only grew 7-10 hairs per cm^2.

This is a low dosage experimental drug, we should be more excited about this, if you read the literature and interviews with Christiano you will see that the drug must be applied at high concentrations directly to the follicle for best results - hence why pill form does not work for Androgenetic Alopecia. It has the ability to move follicles from resting to growing phase in very powerful way, this is exactly what our resting bald heads need! (Androgenetic Alopecia hairs are stuck in resting phase)

Secondly, the TAHC of 5 or so hairs that is presented in the data is compared to a original patient, some studies will compare to placebo, that might lose 5 hairs, so total difference of 10 hairs. Which can be misleading, at least these guys are honest with their photos and data. Just think about how hard it would actually be to accurately count the difference in hairs, I bet more dodgy companies overcount as well.

I mean, is this not a good result for a low dose drug?

View attachment 122108
I may be mistaken..... but aren’t we taking about an immunosuppressant drug here? Of course it’s low dose..... because in higher doses, it’s extremely dangerous, and the side effects are not worth the risk to merely regrow hair. Yes it’s low dose, but to increase the potency may not be worth it, given the potential outcome. I’m sure if they turned up the volume up on androgen inhibitors, it might have great success for hairloss paitients. You’ll have a vagina and man boobs, but you’ll have great hair........ no offense to those who have a vagina.
 

Rho Gain

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
141
No, they didn't. You just don't know what you're talking about.

The drugs that they are using are already FDA-approved; we just don't know specifically which ones they are using. They are still developing their own, new compounds. If they were to wait on those, it would surely be years yet.

They also haven't been doing "20 years of trials" but K.

Right now, we're in a thread where people are acting hopeful for something proven to provide sh*t results while dissing Follica while there is a massive, pro-DIY-dermarolling thread where even the most meager improvement is being heralded as "incredible results".

That's the level of unhinged this community is.

I've quit responding to black-pills - it's a waist of time. You, I, and anyone who has spent any time looking into Follica know it's a breakthrough, and all these depressives will be lining up for it when it releases in 3 < years.
 

Fgsfds

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
245
These results are better than you guys are giving them credit for, it is close to matching 5% Minoxidil : https://dravram.typepad.com/files/minoxidil-104-week-trial-frontal-and-vertex.pdf
In this paper after two years (not 26 weeks!) the much more potent minoxidil only grew 7-10 hairs per cm^2.

This is a low dosage experimental drug, we should be more excited about this, if you read the literature and interviews with Christiano you will see that the drug must be applied at high concentrations directly to the follicle for best results - hence why pill form does not work for Androgenetic Alopecia. It has the ability to move follicles from resting to growing phase in very powerful way, this is exactly what our resting bald heads need! (Androgenetic Alopecia hairs are stuck in resting phase)

Secondly, the TAHC of 5 or so hairs that is presented in the data is compared to a original patient, some studies will compare to placebo, that might lose 5 hairs, so total difference of 10 hairs. Which can be misleading, at least these guys are honest with their photos and data. Just think about how hard it would actually be to accurately count the difference in hairs, I bet more dodgy companies overcount as well.

I mean, is this not a good result for a low dose drug?

View attachment 122108
Wait, that guy looks familiar...

Follica_Hair_Results_Before_After.png
 

pegasus2

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
5,153
That's bad news for the AA patients.
No person in the know believed that Jaks would be effective against male pattern baldness.

They do work great for AA though. I expected this for Androgenetic Alopecia, but I'm surprised they would just give up on their AA drug. Maybe a combination of a smaller market for just AA along with too many side effects.
 
Top