Do you expect seti to replace or supplement the so-called "Big 3"?

[Afro_Vacancy]

I'm wondering what the range of views is on seti around here.

Do you think that people will shed if they switch from big-3 to seti when it's released?

Or rather that it will become a big-4, with slight synergistic benefits over big-3?

 

[warner8]

ugh seti aint coming out for another 3 years. we talk about it when it actually happens

 

[Hairloss23]

no such thing as big 3 as only one of them is big and thats finasteride, seti may not be able to fully takeover on its own at the moment, no one knows, but if they make it more potent with a longer half life then probably. There is also another pgd2 inhibitor called ADC in development which is just a stronger setipiprant with a longer half life. Some people are able to maintain on just seti alone at the moment which is a good indication that yes it will be able to maintain.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

ugh seti aint coming out for another 3 years. we talk about it when it actually happens

As an example, going on minoxidil is less discouraging if it's not a lifetime committment, as in if one can switch from propecia+minoxidil to propecia+seti in three years and stay steady, similarly for finasteride.

- - - Updated - - -

no such thing as big 3 as only one of them is big and thats finasteride, seti may not be able to fully takeover on its own at the moment, no one knows, but if they make it more potent with a longer half life then probably. There is also another pgd2 inhibitor called ADC in development which is just a stronger setipiprant with a longer half life. Some people are able to maintain on just seti alone at the moment which is a good indication that yes it will be able to maintain.

Do you know if it will be released as a topical or as a pill?

 

[Swoop]

Replace? Lmao.

I know for almost full certainty already that this won't proceed to phase 3 trials.

Finasteride > any DP2 antagonist. Cold hard truth.

There will be no market value for it.

It's a hypothesis (PGD2 upstream Androgenetic Alopecia), that will never make it to be a theory.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Replace? Lmao.

I know for almost full certainty already that this won't proceed to phase 3 trials.

Finasteride > any DP2 antagonist. Cold hard truth.

There will be no market value for it.

It's a hypothesis (PGD2 upstream Androgenetic Alopecia), that will never make it to be a theory.

How did swisstemples get regrowth if prostaglandins are irrelevant?

How does minoxidil work?

When do we find out the results of phase 2?

 

[Swoop]

How did swisstemples get regrowth if prostaglandins are irrelevant?

How does minoxidil work?

When do we find out the results of phase 2?

I didn't say prostaglandins are irrelevant. I mean that the hypothesis of Cotsarelis et al. will never proceed into being a theory.

Prostaglandins most probably have their role in hair follicle biology (hair cycling) and further downstream in the chain of Androgenetic Alopecia, but most certainly don't function highly upstream (as per the hypothesis of Cotsarelis at al./Kythera).

At least, I am personally pretty sure of this now.

In terms of the guy you mention, he didn't only focus on lowering PGD2. He took it a step further and took a multi-angle approach, certainly not limited to prostaglandins only.

I don't know why minoxidil works exactly, nobody does.

Dunno either about phase 2.

You'll also have to take into account that they are facing competition of CB-03-01 and Replicel.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I didn't say prostaglandins are irrelevant. I mean that the hypothesis of Cotsarelis et al. will never proceed into being a theory.

Prostaglandins most probably have their role in hair follicle biology (hair cycling) and further downstream in the chain of Androgenetic Alopecia, but most certainly don't function highly upstream (as per the hypothesis of Cotsarelis at al./Kythera).

At least, I am personally pretty sure of this now.

In terms of the guy you mention, he didn't only focus on lowering PGD2. He took it a step further and took a multi-angle approach, certainly not limited to prostaglandins only.

I don't know why minoxidil works exactly, nobody does.

Dunno either about phase 2.

You'll also have to take into account that they are facing competition of CB-03-01 and Replicel.

Do you mean that the increased competition from those two products mean that they will perceive a lower market potential, and thus won't bother with phase 3 due to lower ROI?

 

[Swoop]

Do you mean that the increased competition from those two products mean that they will perceive a lower market potential, and thus won't bother with phase 3 due to lower ROI?

Jup.. But ultimately the compound will need to show how effective it is in the clinical trials. And I raise big questions marks to that, really big ones.

Simply said I don't think their hypothesis will turn out to be true. Thus ultimately I don't believe it will be a good maintenance treatment and something like finasteride is or will be (way) better.

Read here for a global overview why I think that; http://www.hairlosstalk.com/interac...ipiprant-log?p=1286085&viewfull=1#post1286085

Besides that I would have scientific argumentation to support the notion, but I can't really explain that in a hurry. This view is also shared by some scientists though.

After all a compound needs to prove it's worth right? I doubt that a company would go forward with something that is sub-par and considerably worse than finasteride anno 2016 (+?).

But yeah, ROI is obviously very important too and the competition from other companies makes it even harder for them.

May the best win, and let's hope one does actually win and proceed to the market. I don't see a place for setipiprant though personally, we'll see.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

Swoop,

Your point seems to be that Kythera didn't report hair-related changes in clinical trials of seti for other purposes.

But wouldn't they know?

You say seti was bought for peanuts, but the investment is far higher than peanuts in light of the trials.

 

[Swoop]

Swoop,

Your point seems to be that Kythera didn't report hair-related changes in clinical trials of seti for other purposes.

But wouldn't they know?

You say seti was bought for peanuts, but the investment is far higher than peanuts in light of the trials.

The compound was first owned by Actelion, who sold the rights. Indeed, zero evidence of any hair related changes have been noted. This isn't only limited to setipiprant though, you have to understand that many more compounds are undergoing clinical trials with the same biological activity (DP2 receptor). Zero case reports, nada nothing. Besides that, in the meantime enough members have tried various DP2 antagonist from multiple sources. Let me tell you that it wasn't particularly a success as many hoped it to be.

Finasteride does give cosmetic improvement in enough people. I inherently think also that if prostaglandins would function upstream in the chain of Androgenetic Alopecia, DP2 antagonizing would need to elicit some sort of repair response too, which subsequently should give cosmetic improvement just like finasteride does. For that matter, any strong intervention on the androgen/AR angle will provide that in some people.

Why do you think the investment is far higher than peanuts in the light of trials? Setipiprant already went through safety trials, seeing how Actelion also didn't need the compound anymore the buy over amount was probably very low. Certainly when you look at the grand scheme of things we are talking about a low amount. I mean we are talking about the pharmaceutical sector, millions are thrown back and forth like it's pocket change indeed.

At best I think setipiprant might slow down Androgenetic Alopecia somewhat, but will just not be good enough. For Kythera, it's a low investment, low risk thing really to trial.

Also with this I would have other reasoning, but I can't give you a quick guide to hair follicle biology and the implications in Androgenetic Alopecia. For that you really have to open up studies yourself and start reading.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I'm assuming that the cost of a phase II trial is fairly high, more than peanuts anyway. In order to get a p-value substantially lower than 0.05, you probably need a few hundred volounteers, each of whom needs to be paid. You then have doctors supervising the study, they get paid too.

They're not spending millions without a decent odds of success.

But it's a good point that the other DP2 antagonist studies have not reported hair regrowth anecdotally.

 

[Swoop]

I'm assuming that the cost of a phase II trial is fairly high, more than peanuts anyway. In order to get a p-value substantially lower than 0.05, you probably need a few hundred volounteers, each of whom needs to be paid. You then have doctors supervising the study, they get paid too.

They're not spending millions without a decent odds of success.

But it's a good point that the other DP2 antagonist studies have not reported hair regrowth anecdotally.

Far less than having R&D costs, undergoing pre-clinical trial testing and a phase 1 trial. I assume their costs will be heavily reduced also in phase 2 due to the fact that the compound has been substantially tested already in various clinical trials under different dosages orally. They have a lot less to look at, but don't quote me on that.

They're not spending millions without a decent odds of success.

What odds of success? Phase 2 success ratio overall to phase 3 in general is a mere 15% or something like that. Do you call that having decent odds of success in general?

What can I say, again like I said I can't explain you the full story because chances are you didn't open up many studies about Androgenetic Alopecia to begin with, so you won't understand. Let's just say that it's quite a complex pathology. Quite frankly I don't even believe that Cotsarelis really believes in his hypothesis deep down, surely after recent advancements.

But hey, after all his paycheck needs to come through also. Give him 2 million and he will get provide you with something better than minoxidil and finasteride (lol).

Things are not as easy as they seem to be and really if PGD2 would work as one dimensional as proposed after AR activation then strong DP2 antagonists should really provide similar results to something that hits the androgen/AR angle incredibly hard. And they don't, and that's pretty much a fact by now, unless you want to believe in the impossible.

I would bet my money linea recta that setipiprant will never hit the market, without any further thoughts.

Luckily our eggs are not all in one basket though. We still have the likes of CB & Replicel and it's assumable that more possible advancements will follow in the near future.

Ultimately though, time will really tell. But some things are surely more predictable than others . In my eyes, setipiprant definitely is one of them.

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

You're pretty convincing unfortunately.

On that note:

[h=1]Do you expect CB0301 to replace or supplement the so-called "Big 3"?[/h]

 

[Swoop]

I assume you do know the basics of Androgenetic Alopecia, so if we look at CB-03-01 it's quite predictable also actually. It's going to work, the question is how well. It's a androgen receptor antagonist and full AR inactivation would act as a full preventative cure to Androgenetic Alopecia. After all androgens and AR are prerequisite for Androgenetic Alopecia to occur. Remove on of them and Androgenetic Alopecia can't proceed (balding stops).

It's not that strong of a androgen receptor antagonist though and I predict it will be around the same effectiveness of finasteride. The thing about CB-03-01 should be however, that it should have a far better safety profile than finasteride, making it more attractive and accessible to people. I don't know if it will live up to these expectations, but I do hope so. But is it going to be effective? Jup. Will it reach the market though? Don't know, let's hope so. It's scheduled to be released in ~2022 though if everything goes well, damn late.

Anyway I think you should also have a look at Replicel. I cheer for them personally. Simply because because they are less predictable, and in the event that they do hit the nail on their head it could be really big.

Ultimately though, Androgenetic Alopecia remains to be a pain in the ***.

Btw why don't you read some more about hair biology in general? You seem to be quite intelligent based off your qualifications you gave in another topic. Pretty sure you would come to the same conclusions/views somewhat as me anyway. No interest or..?

 

[Afro_Vacancy]

I assume you do know the basics of Androgenetic Alopecia, so if we look at CB-03-01 it's quite predictable. It's going to work, the question is how well. It's a androgen receptor antagonist and full AR inactivation would act as a full preventative cure to Androgenetic Alopecia. After all androgens and AR are prerequisite for Androgenetic Alopecia to occur. Remove on of them and Androgenetic Alopecia can't proceed (balding stops).

It's not that strong of a androgen receptor antagonist though and I predict it will be around the same effectiveness of finasteride. The thing about CB-03-01 should be however, that it should have a far better safety profile than finasteride, making it more attractive and accessible to people. I don't know if it will live up to these expectations, but I do hope so. But is it going to be effective? Jup. Will it reach the market though? Don't know, let's hope so. It's scheduled to be released in ~2022 though if everything goes well, damn late.

Anyway I think you should also have a look at Replicel. I cheer for them personally. Simply because because they are less predictable, and in the event that they do hit the nail on their head it could be really big.

Ultimately though Androgenetic Alopecia, remains to be a pain in the ***.

Btw why don't you read some more about hair biology in general? You seem to be quite intelligent based off your qualifications you gave in another topic. Pretty sure you would come to the same conclusions/views somewhat as me anyway. No interest or..?

I could probably read up on it. However, when starting on a topic it can be very difficult, as one always starts with zero experience, it takes time to be able to distinguish garbage from real science. For example, (this example), I've been reading about hair loss casually for months and it took me a while to convince myself that yes, I should get a finasteride prescription. I briefly considered ... nearly every other possibility.

Nutritional/health literature also has its own idiosyncracies. One of the first threads I can recall on this site is the claim that cistanche and laminaria together lead to ~25% regrowth, or something, it's from a few months ago. This claim might have been fraud? I don't even know if it was a fraudulent claim, a statistical fluke, or if they have a biased sample that really responds well. Similarly with the laser comb studies. There seems to be a lot of fabricated results making it into the peer-reviewed nutritional/health literature.

I'm still surprised by this as it is very rare in my field for people to publish fraudulent results, probably because there's less money involved. When there are wrong results in the astro literature, it's usually because someone made a mistake, not because someone is lying.

At this rate, since I'm spending a lot of time, I will probably slowly pick up more over time. Thank you for elevating the intellectual level of the forum.

 

[Swoop]

I could probably read up on it. However, when starting on a topic it can be very difficult, as one always starts with zero experience, it takes time to be able to distinguish garbage from real science. For example, (this example), I've been reading about hair loss casually for months and it took me a while to convince myself that yes, I should get a finasteride prescription. I briefly considered ... nearly every other possibility.

Nutritional/health literature also has its own idiosyncracies. One of the first threads I can recall on this site is the claim that cistanche and laminaria together lead to ~25% regrowth, or something, it's from a few months ago. This claim might have been fraud? I don't even know if it was a fraudulent claim, a statistical fluke, or if they have a biased sample that really responds well. Similarly with the laser comb studies. There seems to be a lot of fabricated results making it into the peer-reviewed nutritional/health literature.

I'm still surprised by this as it is very rare in my field for people to publish fraudulent results, probably because there's less money involved. When there are wrong results in the astro literature, it's usually because someone made a mistake, not because someone is lying.

At this rate, since I'm spending a lot of time, I will probably slowly pick up more over time. Thank you for elevating the intellectual level of the forum.

Haha, yeah certainly. The problem is also that we are emotionally invested with our own hair loss so that makes us often less capable of being objective. At least such is my observation with many people on these forums and myself. This makes us vulnerable, an aspect where many ineffective treatments feed off.

The claims in published study results are indeed often subjected to bias/manipulation whatsoever. I think the most cited study in PLOS medicine goes pretty well with this;

Why most published research findings are false; http://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.0020124

I remember my first encounter with this. There was a product called Keratene Retard and still is (I think). Basically a supplement and the company involved showed a "clinical trial" in cooperation with the university of Brussels (!). The results indicated that it suppressed DHT nearly as well as finasteride without the side effects. Obviously I bought the stuff, but it did nothing. I tried to give a call to the university in question but they never referred me to the investigators, no e-mail responses either. More people tested the stuff and some even measured their DHT levels and it proved to be bunk. Would never happen to me now, but I would be lying if I didn't fall for such things in the past.

It's indeed amazing how many fabricated results there are, can be really confusing.

These forums can be quite confusing also sometimes, especially for new people. I think the best start is to read about basic hair follicle biology and basic Androgenetic Alopecia literature with no conflict of interest. And generally ask yourself always, if things really make sense. Applying logic really.

That's great. Who knows man perhaps you'll make big discoveries too for hair loss in the future. We definitely need more hair loss researchers!!

You work in the astronomy field? That's mind blowing dude, nice.

NP, and you too.

 

[Wolf Pack]

Of course man everything is better than finasteride/dutasteride. Because they don't cause brain fart or ed, all that matters. Who cares about proven safety and efficacy? Interesting to note that the ones on the forum who are only taking experimentals with Minoxdil due to finasteride fear - have gone pretty much bald.

The experimental section has gone quite over the last few months? What happened to all the mental masturbation about replicel, histogen and seti :doh:

It's good not to hype things up unnecessarily and at the same time always dismiss proven treatments for retarded reasons.

Credit should be given where ever it's due: new treatments and old.

 

[Sweeping]

Of course man everything is better than finasteride/dutasteride. Because they don't cause brain fart or ed, all that matters. Who cares about proven safety and efficacy? Interesting to note that the ones on the forum who are only taking experimentals with Minoxdil due to finasteride fear - have gone pretty much bald.

The experimental section has gone quite over the last few months? What happened to all the mental masturbation about replicel, histogen and seti :doh:

It's good not to hype things up unnecessarily and at the same time always dismiss proven treatments for retarded reasons.

Credit should be given where ever it's due: new treatments and old.

quiet*

 

[I.D WALKER]

What happened to all the mental masturbation about replicel, histogen and seti :doh:

It's good not to hype things up unnecessarily and at the same time always dismiss proven treatments for retarded reasons.

Mental fapping is also very baaad for our hair.