Curis :Hedgehog Signaling Pathway

[Badger]

Hey guys,

 

I know im putting this question on the wrong section of the forum.

I read in another section of the forum about how a company in cambridge calle "Curis" are developing a hair loss treatment along with tissue regeneration and skin cancer treatments utilising what they call the "Hedgehog signaling pathways". Currently they are approaching the human testing trials and there seems to be as much enthusiasm and investment as hair multiplication. They grew hair on bald mice within 13 days apparantly.

 

The only thing is they don't say what the treatment actually does.

 

Is it supposed to use this alleged hedgehog pathway signaling to create new hair follicles

 

or

 

Stimulate or maintain hair that has remained to the same effect as rogaine or propecia.

 

Intercytex and alderans claim to be decades away from a treatment that can signal the hair loss genes to obey their commands. This however sounds like what Curis claim to be developing now.

 

Im in work, the Boss is out and im bored.

 

Does anybody wanna chat?

[Badger]

Hey guys,

 

I know im putting this question on the wrong section of the forum.

I read in another section of the forum about how a company in cambridge calle "Curis" are developing a hair loss treatment along with tissue regeneration and skin cancer treatments utilising what they call the "Hedgehog signaling pathways". Currently they are approaching the human testing trials and there seems to be as much enthusiasm and investment as hair multiplication. They grew hair on bald mice within 13 days apparantly.

 

The only thing is they don't say what the treatment actually does.

 

Is it supposed to use this alleged hedgehog pathway signaling to create new hair follicles

 

or

 

Stimulate or maintain hair that has remained to the same effect as rogaine or propecia.

 

Intercytex and alderans claim to be decades away from a treatment that can signal the hair loss genes to obey their commands. This however sounds like what Curis claim to be developing now.

 

Im in work, the Boss is out and im bored.

 

Does anybody wanna chat?

[Bill - Seemiller]

Badger,

 

I have to admit, I've never heard of this...however, now that I have, perhaps when I have some time I'll do some more research on it. from what I've heard, hair multiplication is about 10+ years away from being ready.

 

If anybody that has more information on this that they want to share, we'd all appreciate it.

 

Bill

[Guest HLBD]

Hello Bill and Badger,

 

I am a freelance science writer and a fellow hair loss sufferer and I have done extensive reseach on the hedgehog antagonist and even spoken with some employees of Curis as to the hair loss treatment proposed.

 

The hedgehog antagonist was named after the hedgehog gnat it was discovered in, not aftetr the cartoon hedgehog as some would believe. The antagonist particle basically tricks the pathway that tells the hair to grow into thinking that it is getting the signal at the same magnitude it did when we were toddlers.

 

Think of it this way: have you ever noticed how most babies look as if they are suffering from advanced hair loss? Then, one say (regardless of whether or not they will suffer MPB in the future) they have thick, full hair? This is because of a chemical signaling pathway that tells the hair to grow. Now, most of us had hair for a few years after puberty, even though we are suffering from hair loss now. We had DHT on the scalp at that time, right - little hint, the answer to that question is 'yes'. So why didn't our hair loss start when we were thirteen or fifteen? The answer is that the pathways were still open and telling the hair to ignore the the DHT and grow. In essance, the antagonist tricks the pathway into reopening and telling the hair follicles to ignore the effects of DHT and resume normal healthy growth.

 

How is this different than gene therapy? Well, it is very similar, however, the particle that Curis has claimed to have discovered doesn't alter the genetic code, just tricks the pathway into reopening. The antagonist cannot create new follicles, but there seems to be some evidence that Curis believes that it may reactivate "dead follicles" and the science seems to support that theory.

 

One little side note on "dead follicles" : there is no such thing in the context of MPB or FPB. The only way to kill a follicle is to cause substantial harm to the skin - a scarring rash, a burn, a cut, etc. I've seen many people and even doctors proliferate this misinformtion on follicles - I cannot tell you whether or not they realize that the follicle is not truely dead. In reality, we are covered in hair. Even our faces and foreheads. We simply possess a gene that causes these hairs to be so miniturized (as they become in areas effected by MPB and similar illnesses) that the hair they grow is invisable and very hard to feel. Have you ever seen the "dog boys" of Mexico? They are covered, head to toe, in hair. They possess a gene which left the majority of the population eons ago. The follicles on their bodies are all active and produce thick, visable hair.

 

Basically, if the antagonist works as promised, it would make the follicle immune to the effects of DHT by tricking the pathway into believing it is getting a signal to grow. Therefore, according to their research, they don't need to manipulate the signal, just fool it into starting again.

 

Whatever the case, we are probably 2 to 5 years away from seeing the drug resulting from the research. Most likely, it will be on par with hair transplants and might even do them to shame. There is some debate as to how the drug would be given. All signs point to it being a out-patient procedure given by a doctor, like botox. There is the risk of the development of tumors if administered incorrectly, so the odds are against it being a treatment give through the normal pharmacy and taken home.

 

Hope that answers some of your questions.

[Bill - Seemiller]

HLBD,

 

Excellent information...I appreciate it greatly. When I have some time, I am going to do some more research on this as well. What you are saying sounds totally logical. In fact...it sort of lines up (unscientifically of course) with a thread I just posted here: http://www.hairrestorationnetwork.com/eve/showthread.php?t=155643

 

This concept and potential solution may prove to be a much more viable solution than trying to inhibit DHT from getting to the scalp such as what finasteride does and dudasteride might do.

 

Some questions...

 

What, if any, side effect might tricking the Hedgehog signaling pathway into believing it's getting a signal for the hair to grow? And do we know what causes the signaling to stop in the first place? Since obviously there is some "tricking" that is happening wiht this method...what indeed is being tricked? Whatever is being tricked may be what's responsible for hair loss all together...which could indeed be genetic code?

 

I'm definitely up for more discussion on this. Thanks for the information and hope to hear more from you.

 

Bill

[Gorpy]

HLBD,

Thanks for providing that informative detail. Medical technology certainly is a fascinating field. It's very exciting thinking about the possibilities, not only for hair, but for curing diseases, halting or slowing down aging, etc.

 

Gorp

[Guest HLBD]

Thanks Bill and Gorpy,

 

It is indeed very exciting! I used to work as a biotechnical tech about three years ago and I loved it. Still, I love writing and teaching even more.

 

I'll do my best to answer your questions, Bill. Unfortunately, I'm a science writer and not a scientist, but I believe I got the over-all picture of the antagonist. Basically, even the scientists at Curis are baffled as to what the "trickery" of the hedgehog antagonist is, but they know that it over-rides the signal of the genes to close the signal pathways telling the follicles that are undergoing miniaturization to continue growing as the rest of the hair that is genetically immune to the effects of DHT, etc. But you are correct in stating that it is basically tricking the hair into ignoring the genetic coding of the follicle to stop it's normal, healthy growth cycle.

 

The hedgehog antagonist has not yet been cleared for testing in humans as the toxicology reports are not in, so there is currently only one suspected side-effect of inappropriate administration, as I have mentioned: timorous growth. However, the scientist at Curis seem to believe that this side effect is avoidable if it is administered by a doctor in a controlled environment. It was they who have compared a possible treatment to a botox treatment - as botox treatment can have effects that they believe would be of a similar magnitude if administered improperly.

 

The other side effects would be, as suspected, unwanted hair growth - as in the "dead follicles" on the forehead and face. However, the researchers believe this can be prevented if the treatment is administered by a doctor. And, of course, the semi-positive effect of rapid hair growth.

 

I'm glad to discuss more and answer any more questions on this or anything else. I think we are all in for an exciting time in the next five years - that is, if things go as planned. It's my feeling that these discoveries at Curis have many in the hair loss industry struggling from the scraps from the dinner table, which is why we are seeing a proliferation of odd devises and drugs which may provide little or no benefit: Rogaine foam, LLLT, caffine...

[Bill - Seemiller]

HLBD,

 

Basically, even the scientists at Curis are baffled as to what the "trickery" of the hedgehog antagonist is, but they know that it over-rides the signal of the genes to close the signal pathways telling the follicles that are undergoing miniaturization to continue growing as the rest of the hair that is genetically immune to the effects of DHT, etc.

 

Personally, I believe that in order for this to become a successful treatment and avoid any potentially unwanted side effects, that the scientists studying this will need to fully understand more about what this "trickery" is really doing.

 

Hopefully "Administration of the solution (when it's available) by a doctor in a controlled environment" will become more clear as more research is done. Since it seems the solution might be availble in form of an injection, clearly, proper administration will be vital to delivery of a successful treatment.

 

I do believe, however, that all risk factors should clearly be understood and known before this treatment is available to the general public. Of course, that is where research comes in .

 

I agree this is exciting news and hope to see something really come of this.

 

I hope you'll keep us posted with any new information that comes about regarding this study.

 

Bill

[Guest HLBD]

Bill,

 

Just read your post on DHT and the real cause of hair loss. You have an excellent point.

 

According to the research I have done, some people possess a genetic code which tells the hair to ignore the effects of DHT and listen to the signaling pathways that are telling the follicle to grow. Now, in almost half the population (at one time or another) some hair will be taken over by miniturization. I believe the answer lies in the genetics, my friend.

 

I grew up in a medical family and have worked for doctors and scientists. I respect their profession in every way; however, we must remember that they too are human and feel an overwhelming urge to be right, even in the face of uncertainty - we like to be certain, because uncertainty is too scary to think about sometimes. The fact is, there is much we don't understand in regards to hair loss. Regardless of whether or not some doctors and scientist will ever admit it, we don't know all the reasons for hair loss. Not too long ago, were you to mention that you believe DHT build-up was a cause of hair loss, many in the scientific and medical community would have riddiculed you - I'm not that old (twenty-eight) and even I remember that very thing happening (mostly to people that were not doctors or scientists). Now look where we are today: "DHT causes MPB." I think it may be a more appropriate cause of hair loss that DHT sparks (in some people that are genetically suseptible) the shutting-off of the signaling pathways that tell the hair to grow.

 

I think you make a good argement. I for one have never agreed with the use of the antiquated Norwood scale. The fact is that no doctor, anywhere can tell you how bald you will become and at what rate. To be able to do so, we would need to all go bald at the same time for the same reason. Not to mention that my father, who is still a NW 4 or 5, would be a 6 or 7 considering that he too started loosing his hair at 17.

[Bill - Seemiller]

HLBD,

 

Thank you for reading my post.

 

My "argument" is indeed an argument, but more a list of questions that seemingly even doctors can't answer specifically...which is indeed why I ask the questions. I suppose I am a scientist at heart, even though this is not my profession...but I'm not clouded as much by the desire to be correct. I'm out there seeking the truth whether I'm right or wrong. The only difference is...I'm letting others do the research .

 

I have the greatest respect for the medical and scientific fields, but you are correct...humans have an innate desire to be right...sometimes so much that they will argue undisputed facts simply because it goes against what has been concluded in their minds as years of research.

 

That all being said...I know the answer IS genetics...but specifically where is yet to be determined.

 

DHT is clearly involved in facilitating hair loss, but there is something clearly underlying that hasn't been discovered yet. I think this signaling pathway may indeed be a key to discovering the root cause. Whatever is being "tricked' by this method, if it does indeed prove to work...might indeed be the root cause of the problem which is what is then shutting down the Hedgehog signaling pathway. Obviously, varying from person to person, at a certain point in time per hair follicle, something is telling the signaling pathway to shut down and the hair follicle begins to be impacted by DHT. Tricking this thing (even if it remains unknown) MIGHT be the answer...but I suspect that more should be discovered about what this genetic thing really is, so that we know whether or not tricking it will be problematic in the form of side effects.

 

I do believe that using the norwood scale is important for a number of things...but I agree...nobody can accurately make a prediction of where somebody will end up on the norwood scale in the future...but it can be used in the present to gaige where somebody is. The fact that hair loss is unpredictable is why when discussing hair transplantation, it's important to discuss the long term plan in the event of worst case scenerios. Though nothing can be for certain, one can do certain things to minimize risks going forward with surgery so that in the event they do lose more hair, a plan is in place to transplant hair in those areas which is why reserving the donor area is always a good idea.

 

Btw...I am only 2 years older than you. I'm 30 and have had 3 hair transplants. I'm a recovering NW6 . Though I've lost the majority of my native hair, I'm reserving some donor in the event I need to do some work below the crown. Currently, I believe finasteride is helping me maintain that hair.

 

Keep us posted.

 

Bill

[Guest HLBD]

Sorry about the typos. I am a typo king - I drive my editors crazy. I have one editor that constantly amazed that I have such horrible problems with typos and yet my grammar is nearly perfect. I just type much slower than I think, I believe. What to do? I guess that's what editors are for, eh?

 

I agree, the "where" is the most important question in understanding hair loss; however, we cannot under estimate the value of random discovery. It is often the researcher that is not looking for the cure that discovers it. I believe that some researchers (because, as I have asserted) are more human than even they realize that they cannot see the forrest for the trees. They try so hard to understand why that they overlook the solution. And, after all, who cares so much why something work as that it DOES work. Frankly, I still don't understand why planes can fly, but I still fly somewhere every other month.

 

Now, let me clarify that I do believe that the Norwood scale is of benefit, but I have discovered that many doctors, clinics, and websites use the orginal scales and not the updated scales. Also, many disreputable clinic often use the scale to encourage men to use their form of treatment.

 

My first and only HT was at 20 and I went to a hair mill that I will not name, but curse for the rest of my life. They, for instance, classified me as a Norwood 4 at 20. I've been to three other doctors since then and none of them have put me above a Norwood 3V with no thinning in the crown - not hard to believe as I follow the same pattern as my father and he still has only very limited thinning in the crown.

 

Yes, these new developments are exciting, but I too believe in moderation when in comes to HT. There are, as I have seen on this forum, some doctors that advicate a more conservative approach than I would like, but then there are others that are way too optimistic. I believe in moderation above all. For my next HT, I'm taking the middle road and going for a quality doc who is cautiously optimistic.

[Bill - Seemiller]

HLBD,

 

Thankfully, I don't have to look at the keyboard when I type, which is why I THINK I don't make that many mistakes on spelling. I've also been blessed with the ability to spell well (and apparently rhyme ). Of course, now that I say all this...I will probably spell something wrong in this post...but oh well. That's how it goes . I believe I have decent grammatical skills as well...heck, I was almost an English major until I decided to switch to Elementary Education. Funny how I have a degree in Elementary Education but ended up working in Information Technology. Ah well, and now on the side, I'm a certified hair geek .

 

Though I think for the laymen, it is OK that not everyone understand how something works, as long as they know it works, that is important. HOWEVER, I have serious reservations if NOBODY knew why something worked but administered a treatment anyway. In your example of flying planes, could you imagine if nobody understood why planes actually flew? I don't think I'd feel comfortable getting in a plane if things just kind of worked spontaneously or randomly, etc. I wouldn't feel too confident that the plane wouldn't suddenly have problems...and in the event that it did, nobody would really know how to fix it. Instead, I have confidence because I know the engineers who designed the planes know how and why it works...so I trust that they aren't deceiving us . So in terms of medical treatments...I would feel very uncomfortable if a doctor told me that a treatment works but they have no idea why it works.

 

But random discovery surely happens and is important to research...that much I certainly agree with.

 

All that to say...as a patient, every day in this community I encourage readers and posters to RESEARCH and understand the ins and outs of hair loss treatments including hair transplantation and how it works. Though it may not be necessary to understand everything...I feel that a strong foundation is necessary in order to make good decisions (knowing the advantages, disadvantages, and risks of what they are getting themselves into).

 

Regarding HTs...I guess "moderation" can be defined in different ways. Certainly, however, it all comes down to the individuals needs, goals, and what can be truly SAFELY ascertained by the physician (again who we end up trusting in the fact that THEY know what they are doing). I do believe in a safety first approach to hair transplantation followed by what is best for the patients long term well being. This is why I have strong reservations about really young people maybe a NW2 getting 3000 FUs transplanted to lower their hairline back to high school days. As we've determined...hair loss is unpredictable...so the risk is extremely high in performing this type of surgery with a limited donor supply.

 

Thanks for the discussion...feel free to continue. And officially...welcome to our community.

 

Bill

[Rhodeman]

HLBD,

 

Interesting stuff. So I guess I'm a bit curious as to what makes this gnat antagonist work.

 

If our genes instruct our cells to make specific proteins which determine our characteristics [i.e. Norwood grouping], it would seem to make sense that being able to identify a "common" protein [or lack thereof] in the affected areas of hair loss vs areas where the hair was not loss would yield the answer to why the hair is lost. I guess how "individual" this protein is person to person would present some of the problem with applying this to more than the particular test subject.

 

So I guess my question is whether or not this antagonist is a specific protein that mimics the area of hair growth [i.e. in lieu of the gene signaling the cell to make this protein in the hair loss areas, the protein is provided using this gnat antagonist]. If this is the case, it would make sense that you'd have to be careful to limit the boundaries of where this was applied. Especially since "all" cells in theory would have the genetic coding to grow hair depending on the direction it was provided by the DNA.

 

Another question. If the term antagonist means "blocking" & not "stimulating", what exactly is being blocked?

 

Regarding the "deadness" [is that really a word?] of the hair follicle, are you stating that this follicle basically lies dormant waiting for a reactivation signal or protein in the areas of hair loss, in lieu of a "new" follicle being created? Is that why a transplanted follicle will continually regenerate itself, because the follicle never truly "dies"?

 

Sorry for all of the questions, I'm just trying to understand the "pathway" & how it works, but this seems to have a nebulous definition.

[Guest HLBD]

Rhodeman,

 

You seem to have the hedgehog agonist treatment confused with a genetic therapy. The agonist is not a true genetic therapy in that it does not in any way alter your genes. There exists within all humans a chemical signaling pathway that tells hair to grow - it is the reason your hair grew in the first place and why toddlers seem to grow hair rapidly. It is not known whether or not the closing of this pathway is natural in all hair-covered creatures or if it is damaged in those that are suffering from some form of hairloss. Whatever the case, the agonist works to regenerate the pathway for all follicles and cause them to switch into their growth phase and grow rapidly, as they do in new born children.

 

It is believed that once this pathway is regenerated, the hair will begin to grow again in the way it was programmed in the first place. The particle doesn't mimic anything found in the human body as you have guessed, it simply acts to regenrate the signal pathways(pathways that exist in all creatures) that have been degraded. And yes, you would (as I have stated) need to be careful as to where the agonist is administered as it would cause all hair to switch to it's pre-programmed growth phase.

 

As for the term "antagonist", it was a misapplied term pciked-up by others in the press and has since been corrected. I apologize that I have only learned recently of this change. The hair growth particle is called the hedgehog agonist and the pathway that it regenerates in being referred to as the Sonic hedgehog pathway (so named because of its speedy growth potential and the similarity of the name to the cartoon character).

 

As for your question on "dead follicles": do me a favor and rub your forehead right now. Do you feel any hair there? No? Well, would it suprise you that I can tell you you just rubbed thousands of follicles? It's the truth. So, if the follicles exist, why can't you feel them or see them? Because they, like the areas where you have lost hairs are miniturized to a point where they barely poke out of the skin.

 

Earlier, I used the example of the "dog boys" of Mexico. If you haven't seen them, do a google image search now. You'll see, their faces are covered in hair. It's not because they have follicles that we don't; it's because they have a gene which was believed to be an active gene (i.e.: not dormant) that causes all of their hair to be long and visable. There are some researchers that believe that this "dog boy" gene is not an active gene but recessive and that those of us suffering from hairloss may, in fact possess an over-active gene )or gene cluster) that causes all of our hair to follow the same path as that on our faces.

 

The reason a transplanted follicle continues to grow is because it is genetically pre-programmed not to respond to the cause of miniaturization. The balding follicle may or may not be waiting for a signal to regrow - if we knew that this was the case then we would know the cause of baldness. As of today, we have a very limited idea of what causes MPB. Currently, we cannot create a new follicle. You are born with the all the follicles that you will ever have, until hair cloning or hair multiplication is a reality (these are the proposed treatments that can create a new follicle). The agonist simply causes the signal pathway to regenerate and tell the follicle to continue growing according to the original DNA map that it was provided. The signaling pathway's breakdown is not necessarily the reason that some of us loose our hair (although this is a very good possiblity); however, it is the reason that our hair grew in the first place.

[Rhodeman]

HLBD,

 

The Blackwell Synergy website has various articles relating to this that I'll have to look at, but at first quick glance at one of those articles, it would appear that this agonist is gene/protein related. It seems that Curis also noted that this agonist is found in the scalp, hence my question as to whether Curis is "simulating" a protein that is naturally found in one's head. Guess I'll have to do some more reading when I get a moment. Thanks for your answers.

[Badger]

Thanks HLBD,

 

That cleared up a lot of my queries. It all sounds logical. I always thought that DHT killed the follicles eventually. At least thats what some flippin trichologist told me.

Ill keep a close eye on all this. Who knows, it could be a reality before hair multiplication. If it does become a viable cure to baldness, it would put all of the current hair loss products and treatments out of busness. The hair loss industry is a corporate monster.Billions would be lost. I ve no doubt that in protecting it collective interests, it would fight back. Perhaps even buy the patent on the product out so nobody could sell it or acquire it.

 

This is what could have happened to that product from the 90's, what was it called,

RU 48871. Apparently the nearest thing to a cure for MPB ever developed/discovered and now its sitting on a shelf in a lab in France. It was a substance that would attach itself to the hair follicle and block out DHT entirely. There were some technical problems with the solution and the clinic developing the product in France shut down. From what i heard research ended there.

[el guapo]

" Apparently the nearest thing to a cure for MPB ever developed/discovered and now its sitting on a shelf in a lab in Franc"

 

-You'd be amazed. Its not only in this industry.

I once saw a piece of software that is infinately more powerful than Photoshop and that can do a lot more - on an old IBM 486 than you could dream of doing on the best computer available today.

 

Adobe bought the software (makers of photoshop) and just buried it.

Its sad but true.

[Guest HLBD]

Hey Guys,

 

Considering the interest in the Hedgehog agonist, I decided to continue my research and answer a few more questions.

 

What is the Hedgehog signaling pathway agonist?

 

The Hedgehog pathway is a natural chemical signaling pathway that alerts the body's stem cells to gather in an area and aide the body in tissue regeneration. The pathway is active in all people, however, seems less active at certain times and is not very active in balding men. The agonist is a synthetic molecule that can activate the pathway mush more effectively than the natural protein that normally would activate this pathway.

 

Would the treatment work for MPB and FPB?

 

This is yet unknown as they have not yet had a clinical human trial; however, everyone I have spoken to agrees that there is no reason why it should not. This is because the agonist would recruit stem cells into repairing any damage that might have been caused to the follicle (even by autoimmune disorders, chemotherapy, or hormonal causes). This should cause even the most damaged follicles to repair themselves and begin to grow healthy terminal hair.

 

Above, Badger speaks of their results in a pre-clinical trial with animal subjects. Unfortunately, the mice were not bald, but shaved. The test proved that they could contain and control the growth cycle of the hair and cause no side effects in the skin. The test was successful in all models for both P&G and Curis. There were no side effects in any animal subjects. They are still waiting for the toxicology reports to begin the IND filing, but it still seems more promising at this point than HM.

 

Will this treatment be better than HM?

 

Odds are, yes. Why? Well, the reactivation of the follicles are caused by the pathway signaling for the use of the hair's stem cells to regenerate the follicles' damaged cells. Since they don't need to create a new follicle, it would stand to light that they wouldbe much more successful than the first trial of HM, which - while technically successful - was a large disappointment in that the hair regrowth observed would not allow this treatment to, in anyway, be conisdered a "cure". Combined with the probable cost of HM treatment and the unimpressive results, the agonist would most likely be far more effective and no doubt much less costly (estimates have been in the realm of $100 to $200 per area, similar to botox injections.)

 

What at the side effects?

 

Generally, since human trials have not been done, they are unknown. In the animal models, there have been no observed side effects. The FDA; however, will be on the look out for the formation of basal cell carcinoma (BCC) or basal cell skin cancer, which is thought to be caused by an over active Hedgehog signaling pathway. It is important to note that BCC was not spotted in any of the animal models. Because of this possiblity, it is likely that the agonist would only be administered in a controlled medical environment, also like botox injections.

 

How would it be applied?

 

Indications are that it will be topically applied.

 

How can you be so sure that the agonist will work?

 

Well, I can't be 100% yet as the studies have not been completed. There is much promise in this treatment as Curis is treating it as a cash cow. Let's face it, if it's not effective for MPB, it won't be a cash cow. To be the windfall they want for their own company and P&G, it MUST be effective against MPB.

 

They have strong evidence that the agonist works by activating the hair stem cells that will regenerate the follicle itself. If this is the case, the treatment should be effective for all follicles, no matter how damaged.

 

Even if hair growth isn't optimal (that is, you don't see 100% hair growth - and there seems to be evidence that this is actually the case and you CAN walk away with a head full of hair like a 15 year-old - one good transplant and treatment with the agonist would give you the 15 year-old look again!)

 

How far away from this treatment are we?

 

Considering their success and the new (and not so promising results) of their cancer treatment, they will be even more focused on their windfall from the hair loss industry. Given that and the backing from P&G and Wyeth, they will probably push it into IND and clinical trials as fast as possible. It is possible that we are looking at 3 to 5 years. Even that estimate may be shored-up by the fact that they may which to compete with HM, in which case, they will focus even harder on bringing the drug to market.

 

What are the chances that this drug will be bought and covered-up?

 

When Curis was a small start-up with no partners, I'd have said that would have been a very good possiblity; however, they are currently partnered with genetic and drug giants: Genentech, Wyeth, and P&G. The odds of someone buying out one of these companies or seperating them from a possible breakthrough in hair loss prevention and regrowth are VERY slim. It is highly likely we will be seeing this drug on the market by 2010, if not sooner - that is, of course, if their human trials go as successfully as their animal models.

[Badger]

Hey HLBD

 

This all sounds to good to be true. But it is consistent with a lot of the medical breakthroughs of late. Considering all the progress that has been made through the study of stem cells and a far more evolved understanding of the human genome, it would seem that we are in the midst of scientific revolution. With the long and promised and predicted availability of hair multiplication, its hard not to be a little skeptical about curis having a product in as soon as 5 years.This curis stuff came to me completely out of the blue last week.

In saying that though, the curis approach sounds more practical. Instead of growing brand new stem cells and randomly injecting stemcells in a somewhat haphazard way for an unknown level of success. The curis approach while it is a bit mind-f**k, it just seems like a better idea. It seems easier to administer and sounds like a more comprehensive way of achieving an overall result. But it yields some potentially serious health risks. It is something i ll watch with great interest.

 

Just a question though. Where do you get all this information from. You mentioned before that you consulted some curis staff members. But are there any scientific sources on the net you could refer me to regarding the (Hedgehog signaling pathway) work of curis. Their website and press releases talk more of money then the science. Id like to do my own research.

[Rhodeman]

Badger,

 

Try the Blackwell synergy website. Here's 1 link........

 

http://www.blackwell-synergy.com/doi/full/10.1111/j.160...%28hair+growth%29%29

[Guest HLBD]

Aside from speaking to other journalists, scientists, and employees of Curis, you can eaily find more information on the hedgehog pathway by typing Curis and hair loss or hedgehog agonist into a Google search bar.

 

Like this:

 

http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/05_20/b3933094_mz018.htm

 

Also, there is a great forum which I believe was created by an employee/former employee of Curis

 

www.pathway2curis.com

[Guest HLBD]

Well, now that I have posted that, it looks like the bad news is out as of today: the agonist collaboration for hairloss has stopped as the saftey profile is unacceptable. It seems that Wyeth believes that the pathway would cause BCC.

 

The collaboration will be ending in six months and Curis will not attempt to resurrect it.

 

Sorry, fellas. Looks like hair transplantation is still the #1 best bet. *sigh*

 

Oh well, in better news, there is some evidence that caffiene may activate the hedgehog signaling pathway... Who knows?

[Badger]

That sucks. F**ken Cancer. I hate it.

Ah well, it was interesting to learn about the curis work though. At least the research is being done.

At least they found this out now and not when people started using their proposed treatment. Like the way we keep using mobile phones and microwaves while ambiguity remains whether or not they cause tumours.

Thanks for the info HLBD.

Maybe hair cloning isn't such a bad idea after all.

[Bill - Seemiller]

HLBD,

 

Really bad news...but as much as we want hair, SAFETY is still the number one priority. Thanks for the update.

 

Bill

[jackkelly]

you guys keep mentioning these dead or damaged follicles and ways to heal them.

 

even the most advanced MPB sufferer has just as many healthy hairs on his head as he had before balding,its just that genetics and hormones told the body to no longer treat normal head hair in certain areas like the hair in the donor areas,but rather the hairs switch into growing and cycling much like the tiny hairs everyone has on ther forhead(they are almost impossoible to see unless you have a magnified mirror and tilt your head in the direction of the light just right.

 

this is what happens and although almost gone,they are still as numerous and really do not need "fixing"so to speak because they are not damaged any more than the almost invisable hairs you had on your forhead since birth are.

 

they just simply decide to follow those genetic/hormonal instructions rather than the previous instructions that told the same follicles to grow think and dark and long.

 

i am a believer in the curtis studies and feel its our best hope and aside from maybe the very first human cloaning experiments(i would never consider it untill i see the results and side effects years later,not to mention that even if i were to trust cloaning and it became available overseas in 3 years,you can bet it will be at least 10 times as costly as traditional transplants and im only assuming here,but since the cells are injected into balding areas,the doctor really has little control of the direction of growth or even distribution/density of the growth of the new hair.

 

i like the curtis idea better because instead or ignoring already present and functioning follicles(just functioning on a much smaller scale with a much faster shed/growth phase)the cloaning people want to try and introduce totally new follicles.

 

seems like its a lot of extra work considering all one has to do is figure out the signals and chemical pathways that tell hair to grow short or long and if the innitial studies are accurate and the timeline is too,then a drug may be available in 5 years or less(nothing shorter than the cloaners are suggesting)and im willing to bet that since its a drug and not actually growing follicle cells in a test tube for each individual patient,the cost will be far less than cloaning and i bet even far less than modern transplants.

 

im willing to bet that if the human trials work,some overseas(most likly india) generic pharma company will begin selling it online maybe years before fda approval is ever given.

 

this may give us risk takers a chance to try the stuff in 2 years or so.

 

we can only hope!!