This is the month we've ALL been waiting for!!! =)

[elguapo]

This month Intercytex is supposed to give another progress update on their Phase II trials of TRC.

Yep, THIS is gonna be the month they are going to tell us EVERYTHING that is going on, and show pics of their promising HM technique.

(I'm sort of kidding, but I am still hopeful.)

 

[No_Hair]

Dude, this is NOT the month we are waiting for.. in September they will show us just the preliminary data results, nothing that can be an unequivocal info about the potential of their HM. They will show us the real full data in the first half of 2009 or later..

 

[elguapo]

Well I, for one, have been looking forward to seeing those "preliminary" results. If they are better than the numbers announced last September, with the range of hair growth as low as 13% for one of the test subjects, that would be something. Good results this month implies good or better results at the end of the Phase II studies. Bad results this month means they are still somewhat clueless as to what is going on, and they might not know how to improve the protocol to yield better results by next year.

 

[Re75]

I hope they're really successful. I'm still pissed off that after they're done with Phase III and move for commercialization (hopefully) there are "regulators" that take anywhere from 18 to 24 months AFTER they get the data to approve it or not. What a slap in the face and a mockery of any sentiment of urgency... it's true I don't know the intricate procedures and protocol when it comes to this stuff but it just feels so constantly set-back.

 

[Matt Skiba]

I hope they're really successful. I'm still pissed off that after they're done with Phase III and move for commercialization (hopefully) there are "regulators" that take anywhere from 18 to 24 months AFTER they get the data to approve it or not. What a slap in the face and a mockery of any sentiment of urgency... it's true I don't know the intricate procedures and protocol when it comes to this stuff but it just feels so constantly set-back.

This makes me wonder if the procedure may actually be available in other countries first, I for one wouldn't mind making a journey to mexico or somewhere to get the procedure done, granted the doctor is reputable.

 

[khali]

I think the delay is due to economical reasons. My economic's professor said that they have some medication for hair growth, but its artificially scarce which means they don't want the public to have it yet. We might sees a lot of advances once Obama become the next president. Since the era of Bush all the investments have been going towards wars. :thumbdown2:

 

[Re75]

I hope they're really successful. I'm still pissed off that after they're done with Phase III and move for commercialization (hopefully) there are "regulators" that take anywhere from 18 to 24 months AFTER they get the data to approve it or not. What a slap in the face and a mockery of any sentiment of urgency... it's true I don't know the intricate procedures and protocol when it comes to this stuff but it just feels so constantly set-back.

This makes me wonder if the procedure may actually be available in other countries first, I for one wouldn't mind making a journey to mexico or somewhere to get the procedure done, granted the doctor is reputable.

Well it would be in the UK first I imagine..but I think the regulators are there for approving it before ANY release. So then after all their months of taking their sweet time to give it a GO (if the regulators indeed do pass it) and Intercytex goes with Bosley clinics for commercialization...it's a toss-up no matter where you go with how competent the people are unless it's completely idiot-proof. Being Bosley has always been sub-standard. Anyway, up to now from what I've read, front hair diffusion might not even be truly helped which means it would be like a cross-procedure between FM injections and the conventional hair plugs, which Bosley would like so they can keep doing what makes them the most money.

In short, I would bet everything I have that this fm procedure isn't a common and truly effective process until I'm so old I don't even care about my hair anymore. But yet I await for little updates and hope that somehow it all just comes together soon.

 

[Petchsky]

I'd never go to Bosley or any company of that ilk. I'd rather be bald than butchered. When are the results of the phase ii out? seems to take forever

 

[khali]

Here is the latest update.

ICX-TRC - hair regeneration

* Data from the Phase II trial shows increase in hair count in 11 out of 14 (79%) evaluable subjects at 24 weeks

http://www.intercytex.com/icx/news/rele ... 008-09-18/

 

[YoungGuy18]

Is what intercyx doing different from Follica?

 

[elguapo]

Yeah, I wish I could change the title of this thread. The results were a bust. I mean, there aren't really any numbers associated with the results, unlike last year, but that probably just means that the results weren't that impressive, otherwise they would have mentioned the percentage of hair growth this year like they did last year.

Oh well. There's always next year.?

 

[CCS]

how much hair growth? 11 out of 14 does not sound promissing. If they can restore most of my hair for $50,000 I'll pay it in two years. But now I'm wondering if they will have it.

 

[Kube8]

Riveting

 

[jimmythebean]

I am not sure if most of you have any familiarity with medical research, but I am a doctor so let me chime in my two cents. A 74% rate of increased hair growth is a very promising result. Aspirin and Tylenol dont have a 74% success rate of getting ride of a heachache, why would you expect a very complicated medical procedure in its research stage to be any better?

This is a great result for a phase II trial and very marketable. This is a real medical procedure, I would expect a failure rate near 25% to be appropriate. Couples spend $50,000 a pop on invitro fertilization with about 80% success rate just to give you some perspective.

 

[Dario]

I am not sure if most of you have any familiarity with medical research, but I am a doctor so let me chime in my two cents. A 74% rate of increased hair growth is a very promising result. Aspirin and Tylenol dont have a 74% success rate of getting ride of a heachache, why would you expect a very complicated medical procedure in its research stage to be any better?

This is a great result for a phase II trial and very marketable. This is a real medical procedure, I would expect a failure rate near 25% to be appropriate. Couples spend $50,000 a pop on invitro fertilization with about 80% success rate just to give you some perspective.

Thank you for you professional opinion. That is exactly what we need here!

 

[elguapo]

jimmythebean, you have a good point. However, that is a mentality that I would like to see change. Let's stop comparing to the precedent, saying that if we catch 70% of the rapists and murderers in the world, then we are doing "okay". Or if 80% of cancer victims survive with this new treatment, that is "good". I want 100%!!! I think doctors want the same. Or at least I hope they do.

I just don't like the idea of mankind discovering something really really great, only to learn that it just flat out doesn't work for the other poor 20% of the population. That is sh*t to me. If it works in theory, it should work always, period. And if we continue with the mentality that 80% is good, then we'll never get there, we'll never reach 100%.

But what do I know. =[

 

[FlashDance]

elguapo....you make no sense

Who wouldn't want 100% of people to be excellent responders? If we get 60-70% at least to respond, is that not better than 0%???!?

You make it sound as if us just proclaiming we will only have 100% success, that we will actually get it.

I will take my chances on the 60-70% success rate drug, and you can hold out for the 100% success rate one.

 

[elguapo]

I think what I said makes sense. It's just a matter of perspective. There are people in this world that want things to work for them, and there are other people who want things to work for everybody. I want things to work for everybody.

Sure, if it works for most of us, then wrap it up and sell it! I use finasteride, and I know that it doesn't work for all of us. What is the percentage of men who benefit, 83%? I forget the number off hand. But what I am saying is, what Intercytex is developing should work for all men, IN THEORY. So to accept that it only works for 79%... well, I guess it is a personal preference. I just don't see why it doesn't work for all men in the study. And to say that that is "okay"... I just hate mediocracy. We can do so much better.

 

[cobey60]

Yeah, I wish I could change the title of this thread. The results were a bust. I mean, there aren't really any numbers associated with the results, unlike last year, but that probably just means that the results weren't that impressive, otherwise they would have mentioned the percentage of hair growth this year like they did last year.

Oh well. There's always next year.?

I am not sure if most of you have any familiarity with medical research, but I am a doctor so let me chime in my two cents. A 74% rate of increased hair growth is a very promising result. Aspirin and Tylenol dont have a 74% success rate of getting ride of a heachache, why would you expect a very complicated medical procedure in its research stage to be any better?

This is a great result for a phase II trial and very marketable. This is a real medical procedure, I would expect a failure rate near 25% to be appropriate. Couples spend $50,000 a pop on invitro fertilization with about 80% success rate just to give you some perspective.

The results were a bust?? If you look at the statistics in the full press release, it says the following:

At 24 weeks the results are as follows:
• Of the five subjects who received DP cells with no pre-stimulation of the scalp three (60%)
showed an increase in hair counts
• Of the nine subjects who received DP cells with pre-stimulation of the scalp eight (89%)
showed an increase in hair counts
• Two subjects were not evaluable at this time-point

The whole point of the Phase II trials was to determine the most effective method of administering the treatment. Clearly 'pre-stimulation of the scalp' seems to be the best method and this resulted in almost 90% of patients GROWING NEW HAIR. We are talking about NEW, SHED-RESISTANT, NO SIDE EFFECT, HAIR!!! As the Doctor said, such a high percentage is very marketable and if they could just figure out why the one other guy didn't grow, we would be talking about the definitive cure for baldness. A bust? Are you kidding me? Sometimes the pessimism on this board is insufferable.

If they start Phase III trials by the end of 2009 we will see the product on the market by 2013.

Get excited!

 

[debris]

90% of patients have increased hair count by two hairs in average. How does this sound? promising cure?

We asume the amount of new hair was rather low. This is because their reports are increasingly more and more secretive (they have given some % number, never given actual new hair counts), and in the last reports they ceased saying how much new hair it grew allttogether.

I think that the best number they given to us was that one guy had an increase of 67% (or some number around 70 I really dont remember exactly). If you are bald or very thin, you probably have 10 hair per cm^2 on your scalp. If you are really slickl nw7, you havepretty much none hair there.

67 increase is aditional 6 hairs per cm^2 for the severely thin guy, to give that guy a decent coverage he'd need around 60 hair / cm^2 at least and that would still be far bellow healthy scalp coverage. That means that the ICX results would have to be 10 fold better then they were if this was anything close to hair transplant.

The conclusion is simple. The thin guy would probably be way better off on propecia or minoxidil. ICX-TRC efficiency is rather poor.