Verteporfin HAIR REGENERATION HUMAN TRIAL Dr. Barghouthi *OFFICIAL THREAD

[MrFox]

7 hours ago, Fox243 said:

Yes, I know of two people who micro needled with Verteporfin (not visudyne) and a FAK inhibitor. Xenath on the scar research telegram and DrPhil in the discord to be precise. Neither had results unfortunately. 

My suspicion is that the threshold with a micro needling device would cause scarring. That is to say it would take micro needling at depth or gauge of needle that would normally cause scarring. It may still be possible to use a micro needling device with the use of Verteporfin to cause hair regrowth. Thats why I think the test Dr. B talked about with injuring the balding area with small incisions and using Verteporfin is a good idea. Essentially, we are replicating micro needling at much slower pace. 

[MrFox]

6 hours ago, Hairgain said:

Well this means most people who experience hair thinning then won't be able to be helped by these drugs. I had a degree of hope and now it's back to zero. Definitely won't be doing a hair transplant either. I guess I will need to be hopeful of cloning injections one day to fix the problem, hopefully before I'm dead.

What do you think is the most promising outfit for the possibility of hair cloning now? 

I wouldn't be to quick to jump that conclusion. We still have to test it in that manner. 

[mr_peanutbutter]

4 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Unfortunately, it looks like the post was removed from Tressless. Can anyone figure out why? This isn't anything promotional. I can't understand why they would remove an effort to get more surgeons to try Verteporfin. 

lol, removing one of the few interesting topics lol

[IberianChad]

15 hours ago, alopeciaphobia said:

I think the bigger questions are if the process can be repeated infinitely, and if we even need to take out an existing (healthy) follicle to have a chance for a new follicle to start growing?

For all we know we can keep punching out skin in between healthy follicles and inject verteporfin, and every time that happens there's a chance for a follicle to regrow. Rinse and repeat. Not saying this is the case, but it's something worth considering to try.

Yea, and since Verteporfin *apparently* insures no scarring of the skin, we could maybe do a less frequent but deeper/more aggressive and medically-assisted wounding. With some anesthesia to make process bearable.

Maybe thicker needles too? Considering it might be regenerating punch excisions which are significantly thicker than needles and that the more we "take" the more is "renewed".

The entirety of the hair follicle actually goes way below the usual micro-needling lengths of 1-1.5mm, the problem is that when you start going deeper than that, it gets terribly painful and you increase the risk of complications/infections, and afaik, most people do it at home.

It makes sense to me that if the hair is almost completely or completely miniaturized, that you would need go deep enough to "rebuild" everything from the ground up. Possibly going 3+ mm to reach the lower layers of the dermis and the hair matrix cells. And as far as i know, this has not been tried yet.

Edited May 2, 2023 by IberianChad

[Rasputin]

20 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

I’ve been talking to Dr. Pittella and Dr. Arshad, they’re both interested. I’m open to the possibility of creating a global Verteporfin convention. If there are multiple surgeons with multiple studies, it would be awesome to compare notes. Let’s see how many surgeons I can get on board. But something for 2024 would be great. I’ll reach out to Killian with Dr. Saifi. 

I have a surgery with Dr Pittella in august, which I'd like to postpone for winter 2024, beginning of the year. Need to discuss with his booking team.

I'd be more than interested if he want to try Verteporfin on my beard (as he'll probably need to deplete everything under my chin). I think that would give a good, let's say not conclusion, but idea of if that regrows hair.

[Melvin- Admin]

3 hours ago, Rasputin said:

I have a surgery with Dr Pittella in august, which I'd like to postpone for winter 2024, beginning of the year. Need to discuss with his booking team.

I'd be more than interested if he want to try Verteporfin on my beard (as he'll probably need to deplete everything under my chin). I think that would give a good, let's say not conclusion, but idea of if that regrows hair.

Are you not getting any scalp hair? Why would you postpone it until the end of 2024? Ideally, we’d want this trials done asap. 

[Rasputin]

30 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Are you not getting any scalp hair? Why would you postpone it until the end of 2024? Ideally, we’d want this trials done asap. 

Not the end of 2024 but the beginning (january or february), mostly work related.

There will be scalp hair but definitely body hair. I think that would be really interesting to see the effects of Verteporfin on a totally depleted area, which should be the case with my beard (at least under the chin area)

[MrFox]

59 minutes ago, Rasputin said:

Not the end of 2024 but the beginning (january or february), mostly work related.

There will be scalp hair but definitely body hair. I think that would be really interesting to see the effects of Verteporfin on a totally depleted area, which should be the case with my beard (at least under the chin area)

That would be an interesting trial, definitely give us more insight. I think when it comes to facial hair it would be able to grow back non-vellus hair in the beard region if you already had beard hair before. That is to say I don't think it would work to grow beard hair for someone that does not have a beard, instead it would grow back vellus hair. This is because hormones/genetics are dictating which hairs become vellus and non-vellus. 

[Melvin- Admin]

1 hour ago, Rasputin said:

Not the end of 2024 but the beginning (january or february), mostly work related.

There will be scalp hair but definitely body hair. I think that would be really interesting to see the effects of Verteporfin on a totally depleted area, which should be the case with my beard (at least under the chin area)

Let’s communicate via pm, I’m gonna try and get this set up with Dr. Pittella. It would be interesting indeed, if a significant amount of hair grows back, it would be hard to refute. Of course, some will say its telogen hair that grew back. You can avoid this by shaving a few days before. Beard hair has a much shorter anagen cycle. Would it be possible to do it end of 2023? 

[MrFox]

On 4/30/2023 at 12:37 PM, Inochi said:

Is it legit?

https://www.youtube.com/post/UgkxrRTLpRClAdZSQJp_W6-ydMTKyvWOkzEb

Perhaps we could invite him and create a thread on here for him? It just might be helpful to ask him some direct questions. I'm really curious to see his point of view, coming from someone who has had both FUE and FUT procedures before. I wonder if there will be a noticeable difference in recovery from the patient's point of view in regard to tension and nerve sensations in the healed area. 

[Fabio69]

2 hours ago, MrFox said:

Perhaps we could invite him and create a thread on here for him? It just might be helpful to ask him some direct questions. I'm really curious to see his point of view, coming from someone who has had both FUE and FUT procedures before. I wonder if there will be a noticeable difference in recovery from the patient's point of view in regard to tension and nerve sensations in the healed area. 

We need to make him aware of this forum

[Hairgain]

Melvin.

   I recall from the discussion you had with the surgeons one had mentioned he was impressed with the recent advances made in hair cloning at the meeting. Were you present at this part of the meeting? Could you give us a glimpse into what was being discussed regarding the hair cloning recent advances made and who's behind them? 

[TEXAN35]

Not sure why micro needling a completely bald area with verteporfin will regrow hair.

I think the expectation is that if you extract hair follicle from a healthy donor area, this medicine will stop formation of scar tissue and thus facilitate the stem cell to create another healthy graft in that area. Unless I am missing something.

 

[Jonathan]

47 minutes ago, TEXAN35 said:

Not sure why micro needling a completely bald area with verteporfin will regrow hair.

I think the expectation is that if you extract hair follicle from a healthy donor area, this medicine will stop formation of scar tissue and thus facilitate the stem cell to create another healthy graft in that area. Unless I am missing something.

 

Exactly what I’m thinking, unless the patient were to be on some AA drugs then it might be possible.

[Rasputin]

15 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Let’s communicate via pm, I’m gonna try and get this set up with Dr. Pittella. It would be interesting indeed, if a significant amount of hair grows back, it would be hard to refute. Of course, some will say its telogen hair that grew back. You can avoid this by shaving a few days before. Beard hair has a much shorter anagen cycle. Would it be possible to do it end of 2023? 

I can't say it will be possible end of 2023. Most likely beginning 2024, but I have yet to talk with his team (waiting for feedback). I'm not really in a hurry to get it done, and I know that much people, for many reasons, are in a hurry, so I'm sure I will be able to switch my date with someone.

To be honest, I obviously would prefer that verteporfin is already fully tested, with convincing results, so I could just use my scalp hair on recipient (already had 3 fue), as it is the best source.

If someone going to Dr Pittella wants to have a try with verteporfin, they should maybe manifest here.

But on my side, if Dr Pittella wants to try verteporfin, and have no volunteer yet, for sure, I would like to try on my scalp AND beard. Because, as I said, he will most likely have to take off ALL beard grafts under my chin (we already discussed this in consultation). This way (like with a fut) we will definitely know if / how much it regrows hair.

[Rasputin]

15 hours ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Let’s communicate via pm, I’m gonna try and get this set up with Dr. Pittella. It would be interesting indeed, if a significant amount of hair grows back, it would be hard to refute. Of course, some will say its telogen hair that grew back. You can avoid this by shaving a few days before. Beard hair has a much shorter anagen cycle. Would it be possible to do it end of 2023? 

Sure, feel free to contact me if you need any informations etc

[IberianChad]

11 hours ago, TEXAN35 said:

Not sure why micro needling a completely bald area with verteporfin will regrow hair.

I think the expectation is that if you extract hair follicle from a healthy donor area, this medicine will stop formation of scar tissue and thus facilitate the stem cell to create another healthy graft in that area. Unless I am missing something.

 

11 hours ago, Jonathan said:

Exactly what I’m thinking, unless the patient were to be on some AA drugs then it might be possible.

Well, none of us is "sure" of anything, but my reasoning comes mostly from the fact that miniaturization seems to be caused by a chronic exposure to androgens(or maybe some other unknown factor, like the buildup of fibrosis). It is not something that is "programmed" in that tissue by default, the opposite is true, that's why you used to have hair there. And since we're damaging it and (theoretically) allowing it to regenerate fully without scar tissue, it should be regenerated according to the original "blueprint", not exactly how it was before.

For example, let's say you acquired a Gecko super power that allowed you to regrow limbs upon activation, and that you have a scar in your hand, some acquired moles from sun exposure, or even a tattoo. If you ever lost that arm and grew it back, do you think it would have any of those traits? If this power is following a "Biological logic", it shouldn't. In the same way that dyed hair grows with it's original color, rather than with the new color you dyed it with and the reason why people "damage" their facial skin with lasers and acids to make it look younger, by regenerating it with finer wrinkles. You said it yourself: "facilitate the STEM cell".

Of course, this would mean that those hairs are still vulnerable to DHT, but given that many are willing to use Anti Androgens or that some miniaturize quite slowly it might be worth it. Also, depending on how many treatments are necessary or if infrequent maintenance sessions are safe and effective, it might be preferable to and cheaper than having multiple hair transplants. Healing works much faster than miniaturization.

This is why i don't think very androgenic hair(like beard/body hair) is the best test candidate for this effect. Or even if it is a decent one, it might not be immediately noticeable. 

[MrFox]

13 hours ago, TEXAN35 said:

Not sure why micro needling a completely bald area with verteporfin will regrow hair.

I think the expectation is that if you extract hair follicle from a healthy donor area, this medicine will stop formation of scar tissue and thus facilitate the stem cell to create another healthy graft in that area. Unless I am missing something.

 

Bald areas still have hair follicles, they are just miniaturized. Why are they miniaturized? Prolonged exposure to DHT and your hair follicles having a genetic sensitivity to DHT. If the area is wounded to the point that it would normally scar but Verteporfin is used to set it on a new healing pathway. One in which "NEW" hair follicles hair being created. So why would the new hair follicle already be miniaturized? 

[TEXAN35]

11 minutes ago, MrFox said:

Bald areas still have hair follicles, they are just miniaturized. Why are they miniaturized? Prolonged exposure to DHT and your hair follicles having a genetic sensitivity to DHT. If the area is wounded to the point that it would normally scar but Verteporfin is used to set it on a new healing pathway. One in which "NEW" hair follicles hair being created. So why would the new hair follicle already be miniaturized? 

Not sure if micro needling is deep enough to damage tissue which produce hair follicles. Even if they did wouldn't they still be susceptible to DHT damage and subsequent miniaturization. I guess, probably experts in this field will probably know more. My point is that people testing it unsupervised at home for this drug does not validate or invalidate the efficacy of this drug at this stage. The doctors involved in this are doing a great job.

[Melvin- Admin]

Microneedling I don’t believe would help. The theory behind Verteporfin is that a wound deep enough to cause a scar can regenerate with the hair and dermal appendages. Microneedling creates tiny micro-scars. They’re not deep enough to create visible scarring. Otherwise, doing it would make you balder. A scar has to be deep enough to where the hair wouldn’t grow back normally. Verteporfin blocks the mechanical stress signal to form the scar. Thus, regenerating the hair follicles. At least in theory. 

[MrFox]

40 minutes ago, TEXAN35 said:

Not sure if micro needling is deep enough to damage tissue which produce hair follicles. Even if they did wouldn't they still be susceptible to DHT damage and subsequent miniaturization. I guess, probably experts in this field will probably know more. My point is that people testing it unsupervised at home for this drug does not validate or invalidate the efficacy of this drug at this stage. The doctors involved in this are doing a great job.

 

34 minutes ago, Melvin- Moderator said:

Microneedling I don’t believe would help. The theory behind Verteporfin is that a wound deep enough to cause a scar can regenerate with the hair and dermal appendages. Microneedling creates tiny micro-scars. They’re not deep enough to create visible scarring. Otherwise, doing it would make you balder. A scar has to be deep enough to where the hair wouldn’t grow back normally. Verteporfin blocks the mechanical stress signal to form the scar. Thus, regenerating the hair follicles. At least in theory. 

Some confusion here, I'm saying some type of micro needling device could be used. I think it would have to be something developed to cause more injury than a typical home device. I agree the home testing is not a good test to base any sort of scientific judgment on. I agree the wounds would have to be large/deep enough that without the use of verteporfin would cause scarring. This is basically what Dr. B said he is willing to try. Essentially creating a series of cuts in the skin, in the balding area, that would normally lead to scarring and then using Verteporfin to prevent the scarring and put the skin in a regenerative healing trajectory. 

I just think practically speaking, it might be easier for clinics in the future to have some sort of assisted wounding device, if that protocol is found to work. You could imagine a scenario where the patient would come in, get numbed, have verteporfin injected, and then have for lack of a better term "micro needling" device used in the balding area. It would be faster for the patient, and it would also allow for a consistent wound depth, circumference of wound, and dispersion. 

[Hairgain]

1 hour ago, MrFox said:

Bald areas still have hair follicles, they are just miniaturized. Why are they miniaturized? Prolonged exposure to DHT and your hair follicles having a genetic sensitivity to DHT. If the area is wounded to the point that it would normally scar but Verteporfin is used to set it on a new healing pathway. One in which "NEW" hair follicles hair being created. So why would the new hair follicle already be miniaturized? 

What I'd like to understand is why FAK inhibitor VS-6063 regrew 50% hair density in porcine studies over 180 days. Wondering if more density occurred beyond that time period or if the hairs continued to cycle. Something is still lacking in the regenerative mechanism ability if it won't produce a result closer to 100% normal coverage. What is it in the process of regeneration with the FAK inhibitor VS-6063 that is still lacking compared to what is found in a natural healthy situation? Perhaps it heals healthy to some extent but still has scarring mechanism present or doesn't contain all regenerative properties to make it perfect. I'm wondering if combining one of these inhibitors with something else simultaneously could lead to an improved result (maybe certain growth factors not being produced FGF-7, FGF-9 assuming that's the case)? Could it be getting a different concentration of injection will produce better results with more hair regeneration? Now it is suggested the FAK inhibitors are superior to YAP inhibitors. If the YAP inhibitors won't work as well as the FAK inhibitors then I don't understand the point to using them over the preferred option. If we see the pigs haven't developed any diseases after the FAK inhibitors used then it makes sense to go with them. If the better FAK inhibitors produce 50% normal hair density in pigs then this is barely the threshold of cosmetically acceptable coverage. We don't even know yet what percentage of hair coverage the Verteporfin provides. What needs to be done is a study of both used separately in a patient to see which works better. Why limit the studies to one drug only? Limiting what can be used won't bring scientific advances forward as well. 

Another thing I'd like to know is how well did the Verteporfin work for Dr. Umar's experimentation in healing keloid scars? I wish he could have gone further into this during the discussion and also did it regrow hair in the process and how much? 

It would be great if there could be a collaborative effort to study these drug types among those with the scientific background to figure out how to best engineer the drugs to use effectively in patients. 

Edited May 3, 2023 by Hairgain

[MrFox]

5 minutes ago, Hairgain said:

What I'd like to understand is why FAK inhibitor VS-6063 regrew 50% hair density in porcine studies over 180 days. Wondering if more density occurred beyond that time period or if the hairs continued to cycle. Something is still lacking in the regenerative mechanism ability if it won't produce a result closer to 100% normal coverage. What is it in the process of regeneration with the FAK inhibitor VS-6063 that is still lacking compared to what is found in a natural healthy situation? Perhaps it heals healthy to some extent but still has scarring mechanism present or doesn't contain all regenerative properties to make it perfect. I'm wondering if combining one of these inhibitors with something else simultaneously could lead to an improved result? Could it be getting a different concentration of injection will produce better results with more hair regeneration? Now it is suggested the FAK inhibitors are superior to YAP inhibitors. If the YAP inhibitors won't work as well as the FAK inhibitors then I don't understand the point to using them over the preferred option. If we see the pigs haven't developed any diseases after the FAK inhibitors used then it makes sense to go with them instead. If the better FAK inhibitors produce 50% normal hair density in pigs then this is barely the threshold of cosmetically acceptable coverage. We don't even know yet what percentage of hair coverage the Verteporfin provides. What needs to be done is a study of both used separately in a patient to see which works better. Why limit the studies to one drug only? Limiting what can be used won't bring scientific advances forward as well. 

Another thing I'd like to know is how well did the Verteporfin work for Dr. Umar's experimentation in healing keloid scars? I wish he could have gone further into this during the discussion and also did it regrow hair in the process and how much? 

It would be great if there could be a collaborative effort to study these drug types among those with the scientific background to figure out how to best engineer the drugs to use effectively in patients. 

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the studies I have seen with FAK inhibitors, it was only a partial thickness wound. It may be that a deeper wound causes a better regenerative response in combination with the drugs. My understanding is that the FAK inhibitor drugs are not approved by the FDA yet and therefore that is why Verteporfin was used. I think that was exactly why it was chosen by the Stanford Team; they were looking for drugs already in use. As we know getting a new drug passed by the FDA can take up to 20 years, so definitely would be a hinderance to immediately researching on human patients. 

[Hairgain]

4 minutes ago, MrFox said:

Correct me if I'm wrong but in the studies I have seen with FAK inhibitors, it was only a partial thickness wound. It may be that a deeper wound causes a better regenerative response in combination with the drugs. My understanding is that the FAK inhibitor drugs are not approved by the FDA yet and therefore that is why Verteporfin was used. I think that was exactly why it was chosen by the Stanford Team; they were looking for drugs already in use. As we know getting a new drug passed by the FDA can take up to 20 years, so definitely would be a hinderance to immediately researching on human patients. 

So when will the FDA approve them? That's the problem. They're slowing things down often needlessly. Again, the pigs seem okay so far, how many years do we have to wait to be sure they're safe to use (FAK inhibitors)? The FDA is slowing down and preventing progress from happening. What I'd like to know is what makes the FDA better at determining than most people in the profession what is reasonably safe from what is not?

Actually the Stanford team used both FAK & YAP inhibitors in studies. Verteporfin in April 2021 and FAK inhibition study September, 2021.

With the FDA being in control how long will we have to wait before FAK inhibitors are used in people? If to them it's not a priority it may be a long wait for sure. I always go back to this. If hair loss research were treated as a life or death emergency we'd have a cure already. Look how quickly COVID-19 was addressed with multiple vaccines. No delays there as to whether they were safe for humans and were being pushed on us. |Turns out some of the vaccines were quite bad too and they allowed them to be used in people. It is in situations like this that I hate these medical authorities. They're hypocrites and have an agenda that is different from ours. If we want something desperately to improve our quality of life nothing should get in our way. Then the question comes who has adequate understanding to know what's reasonably safe to experiment with on humans. What does the FDA have that others don't to determine what is reasonably safe from what is not? 

[MrFox]

1 minute ago, Hairgain said:

So when will the FDA approve them? That's the problem. They're slowing things down often needlessly. Again, the pigs seem okay so far, how many years do we have to wait to be sure they're safe to use (FAK inhibitors)? The FDA is slowing down and preventing progress from happening. What I'd like to know is what makes the FDA better at determining than most people in the profession what is reasonably safe from what is not?

Actually the Stanford team used both FAK & YAP inhibitors in studies. Verteporfin in April 2021 and FAK inhibition study September, 2021.

With the FDA being in control how long will we have to wait before FAK inhibitors are used in people? If to them it's not a priority it may be a long wait for sure. I always go back to this. If hair loss research were treated as a life or death emergency we'd have a cure already. Look how quickly COVID-19 was addressed with multiple vaccines. No delays there as to whether they were safe for humans and were being pushed on us. |Turns out some of the vaccines were quite bad too and they allowed them to be used in people. It is in situations like this that I hate these medical authorities. They're hypocrites and have an agenda that is different from ours. If we want something desperately to improve our quality of life nothing should get in our way. Then the question comes who has adequate understanding to know what's reasonably safe to experiment with on humans. What does the FDA have that others don't to determine what is reasonably safe from what is not? 

I agree the FDA is woefully inept, but fixing the entire drug approval process is way more of a challenge than just continuing to work with Verteporfin. We should consider ourselves lucky that the drug was already approved. Perhaps if we continue to get great results from using Verteporfin than it will be possible to push other drugs through the approval process. Also other countries are much faster with approvals, so perhaps we will see the drugs approved there in the recent future.