Cnn - Cotsarelis And Christiano Interview 10/18

[NewUser]

I'm going to officially decide that JAK inhibitors are a complete write off. Here's why:


So the guy clearly has regular androgenic alopecia along with alopecia areata... only one alopecia was solved.

Case closed.

He was using Xeljanz orally. Oral ingestion of the drug is vastly inferior to topical tofa for boosting hair growth according to Christiano's research paper published a year ago. She already informed us that jakinibs ingested orally produce so-so results.

I will wait until: 1. they develop proper topical formula, and 2. it's rigorously tested on people with pattern baldness

when we used them topically the hair grew back much faster and more robustly than it did orally," Christiano told NBC News - October 2015

Though she thinks men might have the same success with an ointment, she said the trick is that it has to penetrate properly. Compared with the paper-thin skin of mice, human skin is "much thicker, and it's oily, and it's deep, and it's got a fat layer -- so there's a lot to think about when making a good topical formula," said Christiano, assistant professor of molecular dermatology at Columbia University Medical Center.- October 2016

We don't want oral jakinibs. Hopefully we will want to try the topical formulation after actual clinical trials are completed and results show a positive effect on Androgenetic Alopecia.

 

[coolio]

If side effects aren't that important for treating Androgenetic Alopecia then we could all be going on massive finasteride/dutasteride/spironolactone regimens from about high school age onwards.

Side effects do matter.


I agree that Androgenetic Alopecia needs more prevention effort.

We might get more money devoted to prevention if the medical community was not in denial about how much of a side effect problem Finasteride has. If the Big Pharma bean counters believe the official finasteride research then they think if they invented another Androgenetic Alopecia prevention method, with virtually no side effects, then it would only sell as well as finasteride currently does.

.

 

[hairblues]

He was using Xeljanz orally. Oral ingestion of the drug is vastly inferior to topical tofa for boosting hair growth according to Christiano's research paper published a year ago. She already informed us that jakinibs ingested orally produce so-so results.

I will wait until: 1. they develop proper topical formula, and 2. it's rigorously tested on people with pattern baldness



We don't want oral jakinibs. Hopefully we will want to try the topical formulation after actual clinical trials are completed and results show a positive effect on Androgenetic Alopecia.

I have AA--

When you are saying with topical Jax you mean for Androgenetic Alopecia or both AA and Androgenetic Alopecia as being more effective than oral?

I know oral jak works for AA but its got so much side effects which some are really narly i dont know if insurance would ever cover for off label..FDA i think is deciding on long term risks in 2019 if not mistaken.

 

[hairblues]

I dont know if this is old news but sharing in case.


http://www.hairlosscure2020.com/category/angela-christiano/

 

[NewUser]

I have AA--

When you are saying with topical Jax you mean for Androgenetic Alopecia or both AA and Androgenetic Alopecia as being more effective than oral?

Somewhere on the web is a quote from one of them, Christiano, Walker or King I forget which, that says they did a small unregistered clinical trial of topical jakinibs with AA patients, and it worked quite well to regrow hair. Christiano's research shows that topical tof works much better in affecting hair growth compared to oral form of the drug circulating systemically. She and her research team expected the reverse to be true before discovering that jakinibs, if applied topically and absorbed to the depth of hair follicles, works much better to awaken hair follicles from resting telogen to anagen growth. And she discovered that jakinibs stimulate hair growth independent of T lymphocytes or autoimmune attack on follicles, which is probably why she thinks jakinibs might also work to affect hair growth in Androgenetic Alopecia independent of whatever molecular signaling mechanisms cause hair follicles to fall asleep and shrink in those cases.

I know oral jak works for AA but its got so much side effects which some are really narly i dont know if insurance would ever cover for off label..FDA i think is deciding on long term risks in 2019 if not mistaken.

Just guessing but I imagine that once jakinibs in oral and topical form are approved for AA, some if not all insurance companies should cover the prescription. Don't know about Androgenetic Alopecia, but I doubt it very much even if they do get a label for pattern baldness. Like Hellouser said about it, nobody cares about Androgenetic Alopecia except maybe a handful of hair biologists. Someday in the future, medical science and the health care system will realize that we are much more complex biological creatures than they knew. They will realize that mental and physical health are linked, and that any part of us that gone missing affects the whole person in ways we never imagined. They could discover that even something as trivial as hair loss, or so most think of Androgenetic Alopecia now, vectors from one biological system to another. Nothing about us is a separate entity that ceases to exist by some imaginary barrier. I think our hair is more important to us than anyone really knows.

 

[coolio]

Hair loss matters because we happen to live in an era when youthful & attractive appearance has become more important than ever before. Some other hypothetical society might value old age and their balding men wouldn't miss their hair at all.

The medical community probably isn't neglecting any measurable physical condition by not treating baldness. But the emotional consequences have suddenly gotten serious. Especially for men who lose a lot of hair under 30 years old. (And teenagers? Oh man, ANYTHING that hurts your appearance at that age is horrible.)

Baldness is unhealthy to the extent that it is traumatic and socially unfavorable.

.

 

[irishlad87]

Hair loss matters because we happen to live in an era when youthful & attractive appearance has become more important than ever before. Some other hypothetical society might value old age and their balding men wouldn't miss their hair at all.

The medical community probably isn't neglecting any measurable physical condition by not treating baldness. But the emotional consequences have suddenly gotten serious. Especially for men who lose a lot of hair under 30 years old. (And teenagers? Oh man, ANYTHING that hurts your appearance at that age is horrible.)

Baldness is unhealthy to the extent that it is traumatic and socially unfavorable.

.

I can honestly say this hairloss is ruining my life its all i think aboutfrom the moment i wake to sleep and its getting harder to style my hair now that im a nw3, if brotzus lotion dont work i dont know what i will do.

 

[That Guy]

Hair loss matters because we happen to live in an era when youthful & attractive appearance has become more important than ever before. Some other hypothetical society might value old age and their balding men wouldn't miss their hair at all.

The medical community probably isn't neglecting any measurable physical condition by not treating baldness. But the emotional consequences have suddenly gotten serious. Especially for men who lose a lot of hair under 30 years old. (And teenagers? Oh man, ANYTHING that hurts your appearance at that age is horrible.)

Baldness is unhealthy to the extent that it is traumatic and socially unfavorable.

.

I actually think the surge in baldness treatments has more to do with an increased focus on mental health; depression, specifically.

Looks have always been super important. In fact, I'd say they were more important in the past.

Vegas waitresses used to be 10s and nothing less. I hear this from so many guys who frequented the city in the 60s - 80s. In jobs like that, you didn't get hired unless you were hot. Now, it's discrimination.

Just look at how Playboy changed from the 60s until its demise. It used to be classy shoots, with women who looked like they could be "the girl next door". It was literally like taking the absolute hottest women you'd pass on the street, the ones you always wanted to see nude, and giving you just that. From the 2000s onward, it's just the skinniest, total alopecia from the neck down, too much eye makeup "basic b**ch" in a generic pool or green screen setting.

In the past, attire and hairstyle that we'd consider "formal" now were basically standard dress. Now, people in their actual f*****g pajamas pass you on the reg.

We celebrate mediocrity now. Just look at the whole "big is beautiful too!" movement as the perfect example. No one wants to put any effort into looking their best, but everyone wants a partner who does. What do you get for being an ugly, lazy, fat f***? A pat on the back and told you're beautiful too. It's not true, but many delude themselves into believing it.

 

[SmoothSailing]

People have gotten fatter and dress worse.

Looks have always been important.

The main issue is that girls have become much more choosy in selecting mates.

The bottom half of lads have it harder.

Regardless of hair loss being cured this will still be the case. If there are no bald guys then the bottom half will simply change.

There will always be a bottom half of guys whom which most girls won't be interested in until they are looking to settle down as they can f*** around with the top half until then.

 

[Beowulf]

Wait, didn't she say the problem was penetration? Surely that can be fixed. Isn't that the whole idea behind dermarolling, or whatever the thing about sticking needles in your scalp is about? I'm also really surprised that AA patients could grow back anything at all, I thought the immune system completely obliterated the hair follicle like in Androgenetic Alopecia. I guess that rules out the theory about there being some type of special combination of AA and Androgenetic Alopecia.

Plus yeah the FDA sucks ***. From what I've heard the pharmaceutical industry is massive in America, yet it takes an average of 12 years to get anything through the FDA. It's no wonder there's massive problems with screwing kids up by giving them pills they don't need when the industry can barely innervate.

 

[coolio]

The follicle isn't "dead" in either condition.

Those myths perpetuate because of circumstances. Nobody wants to fund pure research about the mechanics of hair loss because the general direction of current science lends itself to trying to create whole new follicles instead. And the "dead follicles" idea has taken root in the baldness forum community because nothing on earth has ever been able to reverse the Androgenetic Alopecia damage very much.

.

 

[Beowulf]

I thought the whole idea behind Replicel was to replace damaged dermal papilla cells to reverse hair loss... Which I'm still trying to figure out, particularly since some people seem to think the treatment is permanent, but it sounds like they'd just end up getting damaged again.

And yeah the real money does seem to be in hair replacement therapy, particularly since one would probably need to get a top up every few years or so.

 

[bboy4]

"It's like taking a brown plant that's all but dead and bringing it back to life again," he said.

This is a terrible, terrible analogy. It would be more accurate to say you have a plant that grows and dies each year, but that it's growth cycles are becoming shorter and consequently the plant isn't growing as large as it should. No part of the hair follicle is "dead" like the brown dead parts of a plant. The fact the hair follicle is the only organ in the body that actually regenerates over and over is the very reason a lot of scientists give for the study of it.

 

[NewUser]

I'm also really surprised that AA patients could grow back anything at all, I thought the immune system completely obliterated the hair follicle like in Androgenetic Alopecia. I guess that rules out the theory about there being some type of special combination of AA and Androgenetic Alopecia.

Exactly. I think that 47 year-old male's case shows that a certain amount of hair follicles are robust enough to survive both AA and Androgenetic Alopecia. They are both categorized as non-scarring alopecias. They don't say how long he was on the oral drug Xeljanz. And yes, Christiano says human skin is a lot thicker than mouse skin engineered to grow no hair. About penetration, she said in an interview last October that this is the problem and it will take some expertise to develop a carrier that will allow the drug to get deep enough in the skin and remain there long enough for optimal effect. Hair biologists like Christiano and Jahoda have that expertise I believe.

 

[Dench57]

Exactly. I think that 47 year-old male's case shows that a certain amount of hair follicles are robust enough to survive both AA and Androgenetic Alopecia. They are both categorized as non-scarring alopecias. They don't say how long he was on the oral drug Xeljanz. And yes, Christiano says human skin is a lot thicker than mouse skin engineered to grow no hair. About penetration, she said in an interview last October that this is the problem and it will take some expertise to develop a carrier that will allow the drug to get deep enough in the skin and remain there long enough for optimal effect. Hair biologists like Christiano and Jahoda have that expertise I believe.

Dude. Give it up.

 

[NewUser]

Dench, we realize you're knowledgeable but no. of posts on Hairlosstalk and H-index are not the same.

 

[Swoop]

I have AA so i dont really understand the mechanism of how the same medication to help AA can help Androgenetic Alopecia..i wish they would have gone into that. Maybe that is what is pissing people with Androgenetic Alopecia off . they are such different ailments it seems 'insincere' and 'could" be seen as Public relations BS to raise funding for Columbia U trials.
Im purely speculating.

That's what it exactly is. Christiano is insincere. It just doesn't make sense at all from a scientific standpoint. It's painful to see how hopeless this attempt is really.

I also wonder how stupid you have to be if you really genuinely believe that this is going to work and then sell your IP for JAK inhibitors to treat androgenetic alopecia that easily to a small company like Aclaris in the pharmaceutical world.

She could have just shown the world through a single case report that this works on Androgenetic Alopecia by applying a topical JAK inhibitor to someone his scalp. Brett King could have helped her with that for instance.

That way she;

- Would have become famous instantly and the hype would be insanely crazy among the whole world and field.

- Would have giants of pharmaceutical companies throwing money at her that dwarf Aclaris.

But off course she didn't do that. She just sold the rights to Aclaris easily as if a possible (near) cure to Androgenetic Alopecia would be worth nothing .

Then again she needs to get bread on the table too, and I bet you know what I mean .

 

[NewUser]

I think some of us are not understanding the task at hand for them to develop a topical that will penetrate the skin to the depth of hair follicles and remain there long enough to be effective given the short half-life of the drug. According to Christiano, it won't be a matter of just whipping up a batch of tofa and alcohol with minoxidil or some lanolin hand cream and expecting it to penetrate. It will take time and money a few tricks up their sleeves as Christiano informed everyone in an interview last October.

 

[NewUser]

She could have just shown the world through a single case report that this works on Androgenetic Alopecia by applying a topical JAK inhibitor to someone his scalp. Brett King could have helped her with that for instance.

So you think she would just mix-up some Tofa with dmso or hand cream on the fly and then slather it on a few scalps of people with Androgenetic Alopecia? lol!

 

[Swoop]

So you think she would just mix-up some Tofa with dmso or hand cream on the fly and then slather it on a few scalps of people with Androgenetic Alopecia? lol!

Topical JAK inhibitors work for AA already, don't they? So how do they don't penetrate sufficiently to exert their biological activity? .