Chances of dutasteride one day being approved for hair loss?

[Guest]

If it works for hair loss, why havn’t they funded for it again?

If it made more difference than finasteride, don't you think they’d have had it approved by now?

They’d made a mint if it was.

 

[dead]

trials cost millions, finasteride sales pattern (as propecia) has been less than spectacular, glaxo probably have other more dynamic areas of bussiness growth. Betamax was better quality than VHS but the market gave the win to VHS, a products superiority does not always translate to market superiority.

 

[Cassin]

ZERO

It will not happen

They have moved on after 2 phase 3 postponements. They claim there is not enough of a marketable difference in the minds of potential users between Propecia and Avodart to make it worth their while for further spending on testing. Keep in mind, most people do not research as much as we do so there would be confusion between the two and the cost would certainly be the final factor for most thereby going with Propecia.

In my opinion, I think side effects and how long they lasted was a factor as well, probably a bigger one than they are willing to admit. I will never touch the stuff, no chance.

 

[Johnny24601]

re:

It is a safety issue. Hairloss is a huge issue to men and if they can prove that their product is safe and more effective then Propecia then they stand to make a fortune. The FDA looks at drug intended for male pattern baldness (an issue that is purely an asthetic problem and not a health issue) in a different framework then a drug intended for those with prostate problems (a potentially life threatening health issue).
How is Merck not profiting? Where are these sales numbers? Could the generics and proscar sales be killing their bottom line?

 

[Cassin]

Re: re:

How is Merck not profiting? Where are these sales numbers? Could the generics and proscar sales be killing their bottom line?

Medical insurance does not cover Propecia, not many are willing to spend $60 to $70 a month for it out of their own pocket. Besides, not as many people as you think care about hair. When was the last time you saw an advertisement for it in any form of media? I see maybe 2 a year. It's simple not that big of a money maker for them. Worth keeping around, but not worth a whole lot of further development in advertising dollars.

The sales of Proscar are a non issue. Not many people know about it.

 

[sam-]

I just want to know, WHAT IS THE REAL REASON for not marketing it for hair loss.
:boom:

 

[Slartibartfast]

Money. Selling Avodart as a treatment for BPH - a well defined market - only brought in £26 million in Q1 2005 (and some of that is from people, like me, using it for male pattern baldness). I say only because the average revenue for each of GSK's drugs is comfortably above £100 million per quarter. Unless they're confident that Avodart will be prescribed en masse to us baldies why tie up their resources in further clinical trials - they have a finite amount of clinicians and a very full basket of drugs in phase I, II, and III trials.

Slarti

 

[Cassin]

I just want to know, WHAT IS THE REAL REASON for not marketing it for hair loss.
:boom:

I explained it. 8)

 

[Guest]

If they could market it you could grow an animal on your head. Wicked or what!!