New discovery at University of Pennsylvania

parsi

New Member
Reaction score
0
Penn Medicine Experts Identify Male Pattern Baldness Inhibitor, Target for Hair Loss Treatments

http://www.upenn.edu/pennnews/news/...-causing-male-pattern-baldness-and-target-ha

Researchers from the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania have identified an abnormal amount a protein called Prostaglandin D2 in the bald scalp of men with male pattern baldness, a discovery that may lead directly to new treatments for the most common cause of hair loss in men. In both human and animal models, researchers found that a prostaglandin known as PGD2 and its derivative, 15-dPGJ2, inhibit hair growth. The PGD2-related inhibition occurred through a receptor called GPR44, which is a promising therapeutic target for androgenetic alopecia in both men and women with hair loss and thinning. The study is published in Science Translational Medicine.

Male pattern baldness strikes 8 of 10 men under 70 years old, and causes hair follicles to shrink and produce microscopic hairs, which grow for a shorter duration of time than normal follicles.

Researchers took an unbiased approach when scanning for potential biological causes of baldness, looking in scalp tissue from balding and non-bald spots from men with male pattern baldness and then corroborating findings in mouse models. They found that levels of PGD2 were elevated in bald scalp tissue at levels 3 times greater than what was found in comparative haired scalp of men with androgenetic alopecia. When PGD2 was added to cultured hair follicles, PGD2-treated hair was significantly shortened, while PGD2's derivative, 15-dPGJ2, completely inhibited hair growth.

"Although a different prostaglandin was known to increase hair growth, our findings were unexpected, as prostaglandins haven't been thought about in relation to hair loss, yet it made sense that there was an inhibitor of hair growth, based on our earlier work looking at hair follicle stem cells," said George Cotsarelis, MD, chair and professor of Dermatology, and senior author on the studies. In a Penn study published in the Journal of Clinical Investigation last year, underlying hair follicle stem cells were found intact, suggesting that the scalp was lacking an activator or something was inhibiting hair follicle growth.

Click here to view the full release.
 

underdog12

Member
Reaction score
0
My father is a researcher at Oxford attending a lecture series and conference. He had a conversation with a well respected exec at Pfizer who was telling him how AstraZeneca, a competitor, had already began clinical trials with different receptors. She raved about this being a big breakthrough and could be a big loss for her company, if a competitor discovered the cure first. Apparently, big Pharma tries to gain as much insight about their competitors as possible.

I argued with him and gave him some insight from HairLossTalk.com about Replicel, and the failed companies before.

He made me realize something. Pharma is not an oligopoly. We see these buttf*** new companies with zero credibility come around just to raise investment and straight flop. There are large profitable pharmaceutical companies with massive R&D at their disposal. Why would they broadcast their advancements? They don't have to immediately increase share price like startups. It would make more sense to keep their secret weapon under wraps and avoid massive PR stints in the beginning stages.
 
Last edited:

2020

Experienced Member
Reaction score
50
underdog12 said:
My father is a doctor and researcher and was at Oxford attending a lecture series and conference. He had a conversation with a well respected exec at Pfizer who was telling him how AstraZeneca, a competitor, had already began clinical trials with different receptors. She raved about this being a big breakthrough and could be a big loss for her company, if a competitor discovered the cure first. Apparently, big Pharma tries to gain as much insight about their competitors as possible.

I argued with him and gave him some insight from HairLossTalk.com about Replicel, and the failed companies before.

He made me realize something. Pharma is not an oligopoly. We see these buttf*** new companies with zero credibility come around just to raise investment and straight flop. There are large profitable pharmaceutical companies with massive R&D at their disposal. Why would they broadcast their advancements? They don't have to immediately increase share price like startups. It would make more sense to keep their secret weapon under wraps and avoid massive PR stints in the beginning stages.

so you're saying that some big pharma companies are already working on a cure for hair loss IN SECRET?
 

underdog12

Member
Reaction score
0
Not in secret. You find excerpts all over medical journals telling you that clinical trials are in place for certain discoveries.

Does Apple tell you what the Ipad 3 will look like or what its specs will be months or years in advance? R&D usually works this way. The only companies that seem to broadcast regularly are small pharmaceutical startups.. looking for more investment.
 

kc444

Established Member
Reaction score
8
underdog12 said:
Not in secret. You find excerpts all over medical journals telling you that clinical trials are in place for certain discoveries.

Does Apple tell you what the Ipad 3 will look like or what its specs will be months or years in advance? R&D usually works this way. The only companies that seem to broadcast regularly are small pharmaceutical startups.. looking for more investment.

I agree with this. A company like Merck has billions of dollars and the best scientists in the world. They're not going to announce anything until they are required to. Also, when a biotech startup has a potentially promising treatment for something, one of the pharmaceutical giants like AstraZeneca will enter into a licensing agreement with said company in order to fund their research, etc. This agreement allows the large company to produce the drug (and fund more expensive Phase 3 trials) while paying the small company hefty royalties if it gets FDA approved.

tl;dr - Expect Big Pharma to have a hand in the cure if/when it is developed. The chance of a small company like Replicel developing a cure is extremely minute.
 

2020

Experienced Member
Reaction score
50
kc444 said:
tl;dr - Expect Big Pharma to have a hand in the cure if/when it is developed. The chance of a small company like Replicel developing a cure is extremely minute.

my god you're dumber than Vin Diesel....

What makes you think Merck is even working on curing hair loss? Finasteride was made to treat enlarged prostate. With reduced DHT levels, hair starts growing back so they released Propecia to sell it to people to treat hair loss.
Merck is not in the "hair loss" business. They have plenty other drugs that make billions for them. Baldness cure won't make a slightest dent in their overall profits.....
 

2020

Experienced Member
Reaction score
50
TravisB said:
So, you say Vin Diesel is dumb?

no not really.... I was actually gonna edit him out because I know how conscious he is about his hair loss. Check out his posts on hairsite :whistle: :whistle: :whistle:
 
Top