Bayer Prolactin Receptor Antibody For Male And Female Pattern Hair Loss

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
In other words, it's a long way off and even when it comes it might be priced out of the reach of some of us, so we'd be smart to focus on experimenting with SMI-6 to find a concentration/frequency that works or on other PRLR antagonists or other methods of attacking the PRL angle.
Yes and if the best case is 5 years, what’s the average case? Worst case?

re: SMI - even the HMI patent references research that shows the high unlikelihood that conventional PRLR antagonists can work similarly…

But if you’ve already crossed the Rubicon by using estrogens (implying you’ve tried everything with good scientific support and are now looking beyond that)…then sure
 

Throwaway94

Experienced Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
614
Yes and if the best case is 5 years, what’s the average case? Worst case?

re: SMI - even the HMI patent references research that shows the high unlikelihood that conventional PRLR antagonists can work similarly…

But if you’ve already crossed the Rubicon by using estrogens (implying you’ve tried everything with good scientific support and are now looking beyond that)…then sure
SMI isn't a conventional PRLR antagonist. It's brand new and still under research, and we all know that prl medication until now has been dopaminergic in terms of MoA. Until 2018 there were no prospective safe and selective PRLR antagonists whatsoever.
 

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
SMI isn't a conventional PRLR antagonist
well SMI-6 is "conventional" in the sense that all the evidence for massive hair growth via the prolactin angle so far is in animals using either:
1. PRLR antibodies (HMI)
2. PRLR knockout (mice)

maybe "more conventional" is a better way to put it compared to those things which are by their nature far more potent
It's brand new and still under research
I hope it works too, but an absence of information because it's new is absolutely not a good thing. It just makes cherry-picking the positives easier because there's less research

just the step where they had to clone human PRLR into mice to even test out SMI-6 creates uncertainty for how it will work in humans, on top of them admitting to knowing almost nothing about metabolites and pharmacokinetics...

after reading their analysis, SMI-6 seems more like a useful precursor molecule to designing similar but more efficacious drugs, than a reasonable therapy itself
 

Otrebor

Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
21
Let's assume they get approval for the trial and start recruiting by the end of the year. That puts them at least 3 months into 2022 before they are fully enrolled, at least 9 months into 2022 before the end of the trial, then at least 10 months into 2022 for data analysis. Let's say best case scenario they can apply for a pivotal trial at the start of 2023. Let's say 3 months best case before they get the green light, another 5 months+ to recruit and one year for the trial. That puts us 8 months into 2024. A couple months to prepare their application with the FDA. Best case scenario puts approval at q1 2025. It is realistic to say it could be available in 2026 assuming the trials go well.
Since it will take a while and many of us do not have time we could concentrate on a megathread in which to connect searches and look for the pathways in which prolactin is involved, maybe we understand something more and find an alternative compound to smi that can give us more time for the antibody to be unavailable (assuming it will be)
 

John Difool

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,309
Let's assume they get approval for the trial and start recruiting by the end of the year. That puts them at least 3 months into 2022 before they are fully enrolled, at least 9 months into 2022 before the end of the trial, then at least 10 months into 2022 for data analysis. Let's say best case scenario they can apply for a pivotal trial at the start of 2023. Let's say 3 months best case before they get the green light, another 5 months+ to recruit and one year for the trial. That puts us 8 months into 2024. A couple months to prepare their application with the FDA. Best case scenario puts approval at q1 2025. It is realistic to say it could be available in 2026 assuming the trials go well.
I came up roughly with the same landing date: 2025. You will probably get a more impressive regrowth if your HF don't continue to be damaged in the interim.
 

John Difool

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,309
Since it will take a while and many of us do not have time we could concentrate on a megathread in which to connect searches and look for the pathways in which prolactin is involved, maybe we understand something more and find an alternative compound to smi that can give us more time for the antibody to be unavailable (assuming it will be)
Do you really believe this community of broscientists can come up with something better than what is being researched by people who do that for a living? Newsflash: all we can do is leech on published studies and papers and try to get it sooner than the FDA on our scalp by going GBs that other folks here are trying to kill in the nest. The real power of this community is to be guinea pigs by testing the compounds before they are on the market and report their experience. Unfortunately with a gang of hooligans, side-bitchers and naysayers, we can't even manage to do that right. So what gives?
 

Otrebor

Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
21
Do you really believe this community of broscientists can come up with something better than what is being researched by people who do that for a living? Newsflash: all we can do is leech on published studies and papers and try to get it sooner than the FDA on our scalp by going GBs that other folks here are trying to kill in the nest. The real power of this community is to be guinea pigs by testing the compounds before they are on the market and report their experience. Unfortunately with a gang of hooligans, side-bitchers and naysayers, we can't even manage to do that right. So what gives?
Having studies available is not so obvious.

obviously I am not under the illusion that something can come out of this forum before the researchers get there, I just say that many research threads are very interesting and broaden the vision, it does not detract from the fact that afterwards we can get to use compounds in a more conscious way.

an investigation and discussion thread that manages to link all the most interesting researches that are posted would not be bad at all, I'm just proposing
 

John Difool

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,309
Having studies available is not so obvious.

obviously I am not under the illusion that something can come out of this forum before the researchers get there, I just say that many research threads are very interesting and broaden the vision, it does not detract from the fact that afterwards we can get to use compounds in a more conscious way.

an investigation and discussion thread that manages to link all the most interesting researches that are posted would not be bad at all, I'm just proposing
Coming into 2022, there is no problems getting studies on anything for free on the Internet. If it's published and peer reviewed, it can be accessed and discussed already. This is actually another powerful weapon in this community to constantly sleuth for new studies on cancer related drugs benefiting hair loss and post them in the "New Research, Studies, and Technologies", this very same section you are posting in.

So, I am not sure how new you are here, but posting links on research is already happening already. Your "magathread" is already the section of the forum (except for the occasional deranged posts from a minority of people.) What more do you need?

PS: I don't know why I am replying in a GB thread. Sorry OP. Maybe you should create your own thread to discuss this if you have further comments.
 

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
Do you really believe this community of broscientists can come up with something better than what is being researched by people who do that for a living? Newsflash: all we can do is leech on published studies and papers and try to get it sooner than the FDA on our scalp by going GBs that other folks here are trying to kill in the nest. The real power of this community is to be guinea pigs by testing the compounds before they are on the market and report their experience. Unfortunately with a gang of hooligans, side-bitchers and naysayers, we can't even manage to do that right. So what gives?
if merely paraphrasing the original researchers' own doubts and uncertainties about metabolism and dosing is "killing it in the nest"...
then the idea was kind of dead on arrival

anybody that disagrees can still just grab a few people to try it out

a competent group of people could figure out whether SMI works within 6 months, given how insanely massive the hair growth effect should be

and then if they wanted to do a service to the community beyond trying to grow their own hair, they could share their journals/logging/analysis of their group experiment
 

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
can you outline the paragraph it says that?
page 3 of the patent:
"PRL variants as well as competitive PRLR antagonists are not effective in neutralizing local PRL signaling in the hair follicle due to their negative characteristics which are 1) a reduced PRLR inhibition in the presence of increasing PRL concentrations due to the competitive mechanism of action, 2) reduced half-life, and 3) reduced affinity to the PRLR if compared to PRL."
 

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
I wouldn't put HRT beyond science.
if, as a man, you're using estrogens to grow hair - then you're already reached the point of relying a lot more on anecdotal evidence

it's not "beyond science", just far less objective information is available for now. As MtF transitioning has become much more studied the past 15 years, I expect that to change

so if already relying on mostly anecdotal reasoning, then another leap to trying SMI/WAY makes sense because it's all that's left
since presumably you didn't skip the step where you tried finasteride/min lol

(although somehow there are people with routines like RU + E2 on this site...always wondered what got them there)
 

-specter-

Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
40
I came up roughly with the same landing date: 2025. You will probably get a more impressive regrowth if your HF don't continue to be damaged in the interim.
how can we preserve the hf before it comes out? I am using the famous big 3 and the microneedler
 

John Difool

Senior Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
1,309

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
Y

thanks. there is nothing new here. these are the limitations of SMI vs HMI and the people using SMI know those too.
Right, some people were aware of these issues and hoped that SMI overcomes them
(edit: I do question how many of the participants actually were aware of this, given the attempts in this thread to chill discussion)

Not saying that's dumb, I just don't see how that's likely in the absence of dosage and pk information unless explicitly accounted for in a group experiment...

These quotes demonstrate that you're effectively taking the uncertainties of one preclinical drug (HMI) and multiplying them by those of another preclinical drug (SMI):
-"future structural modifications of SMI-6 should be undertaken so as to increase its therapeutic window"
-"This report represents an early pre-clinical phase"
-"should be further optimized and improved before it can be considered as therapeutics"
-"a more complete characterization of the pharmacodynamics and metabolic stability of SMI-6"
-"a determination of its oral deliverability"
-"resolution of the exact mechanism which governs the PRLR independent anti-tumorigenic action of SMI-6"
 
Last edited:

jan_miezda

Banned
My Regimen
Reaction score
298
if merely paraphrasing the original researchers' own doubts and uncertainties about metabolism and dosing is "killing it in the nest"...
then the idea was kind of dead on arrival

anybody that disagrees can still just grab a few people to try it out

a competent group of people could figure out whether SMI works within 6 months, given how insanely massive the hair growth effect should be

and then if they wanted to do a service to the community beyond trying to grow their own hair, they could share their journals/logging/analysis of their group experiment

“a competent group of people could figure out whether SMI works within 6 months, given how insanely massive the hair growth effect should be”

until the half life, volume of distribution , clearance rate and AUC of SMI are not known .. any administration of it is just a shot in the dark and very unlikely to work . Even if smi has therapeutic proprieties for Androgenetic Alopecia it’s useless to try without knowing those things and why clinical trials are important
 

hmmmmmmmm

Established Member
My Regimen
Reaction score
100
until the half life, volume of distribution , clearance rate and AUC of SMI are not known .. any administration of it is just a shot in the dark and very unlikely to work . Even if smi has therapeutic proprieties for Androgenetic Alopecia it’s useless to try without knowing those things and why clinical trials are important
for group testing of any other non-androgenic pathway treatments, I'd normally agree

but a DIY experiment with HMI (and thus SMI) has completely different starting priors that make it much easier than testing e.g. SM0554:
1. can grow hair in completely bald areas
2. strong effect timeframe is 3-6 months
3. works in almost everyone
4. no obvious notable safety concerns

under those assumptions, even a single person should be able to make a guess at a starting oral/topical/injection dosage and keep escalating it every few months, periodically checking to see if their temples actually grow any new terminal hairs...

and with 20 people and 12 months (changing doses every 2 months) you could test out 100+ different dosages and see if even a single person who's maxed out on other treatments grows hair, to confirm that SMI works...

and if 12 months goes by and nobody has results, assume it doesn't work
 
Top