Aderans vs. Histogen

[timmy]

Hey Gang,
I am trying to understand the fundamental difference between Histogen and Aderans. Are they both not injections that create new hair follicles?
Also, was also wondering whether injections would work on transplanted areas. Has there been any talk on that?
Lastly, the last cost estimate on Histogen was 5k. This seems too low. Has there been any cost estimates on Aderans?

 

[what]

Aderans is taking a hair follicle from your head, extracting cells, replicating them in a petri dish and reimplanting them in your bald zones. The cells will form new hair follicles.

Histogen is incubating stem cells in low gravity environment and capturing their secretions, which contain "growth factors". Whatever it is they siphon off from these cells is being injected into your bald zones and promoting regrowth.

Not sure about injecting into transplanted regions. I would think, as long as the scarring isn't too extensive that there would be no problems growing new hairs or regenerating old ones.

"Lastly, the last cost estimate on Histogen was 5k. This seems too xxx"

Never, ever, under any circumstances repeat these words again

 

[andrei_eremenko]

5000 for a simple injection is too much I think...you will need probably more than one injection...I am wondering if this will be just a "cure" for those with early stages of male pattern baldness and not for everyone...I mean let's say a sleek bald scalp norwood 6... so would these products bring your hair to a norwood 1 no matter what norwood you have been before?

 

[timmy]

Aderans is taking a hair follicle from your head, extracting cells, replicating them in a petri dish and reimplanting them in your bald zones. The cells will form new hair follicles.

Histogen is incubating stem cells in low gravity environment and capturing their secretions, which contain "growth factors". Whatever it is they siphon off from these cells is being injected into your bald zones and promoting regrowth.

Not sure about injecting into transplanted regions. I would think, as long as the scarring isn't too extensive that there would be no problems growing new hairs or regenerating old ones.

"Lastly, the last cost estimate on Histogen was 5k. This seems too xxx"

Never, ever, under any circumstances repeat these words again

Thanks for the response. At this point of time, which won do you think is more promising at adding density? Can both work on hairlines.

 

[andrei_eremenko]

I think histogen is more capable to create density...looking at the clinical trials...

 

[Matt Skiba]

5000 for a simple injection is too much I think...you will need probably more than one injection...I am wondering if this will be just a "cure" for those with early stages of male pattern baldness and not for everyone...I mean let's say a sleek bald scalp norwood 6... so would these products bring your hair to a norwood 1 no matter what norwood you have been before?

The pictures don't indicate that unfortunately, even if it is progress it may not be the end all, be all. It may not be enough to take that poison finasteride off the market.

I think what everyone is waiting for is information on whether the procedure can be repeated consistently.

Trichoscience seems like it may be a while longer, but anything effective to hold us off until then will be greatly welcomed.

 

[andrei_eremenko]

I don't know will be all these scam? I mean...when I hear hair multiplication...or cloning I am thinking that I could make from 20 hairs 20000 if I want...not just to replace some kind of propecia...or minoxidil...we want hair not a medication that will do nothing just to grow 1 hair here and there...let's hope I am wrong...

 

[Innermind]

Adreans: taking dermal papilla cells(essentially hair "stem cells") from non balding areas then growing them in the lab. Taking these cells and then injecting them into your scalp. New dermal papilla cells will help stimulate hair growth in current live follicles and produce new follicles.


Histogen: Mimicking fetal (in the womb) conditions in order to create a certain ratio of proteins and growth factors that are present in the womb which cause rapid growth and cell generation, obviously in the womb we are rapidly growing. Then, filtering out proteins and other molecules deemed unnecessary for hair regeneration or that are associated with cancer growth. Finally, taking these growth factors and proteins and injecting them into the scalp. Theory is that the compounds present in the injection and the ratio they are in will stimulate new follicle cells to grow and also start dormant follicle cells to start growing again.

Follica: Causing a wound to skin, then applying a chemical cocktail which will alter the healing process to not just grow new skin, but skin with new hair follicles.


Based on results so far my bet is with Histogen. In a few years of testing they have product better results than over a decade of "HM" has, although I predict it will require a follow visit to a doctor every few years so, not a big deal imo. I think follica will work too, but something tells me the fundamental process on the celluar level is very similar to Histogen, just the method of creating the environment is different.


HM, as is dermal papilla cell method, first really investigated by doctor Gho from the late nineties to mid 2000's and failed, then Intercytex used similar method and failed, now Adreans is trying they will fail. Its not a complete fail, it does grow hair, just not cosmetically appreciable hair (only 18% new hair growth over 30 microns. The thinnest acceptable hair is about 60 microns which you see with very fine blonde hair, thick black Asian is about 120 microns, 30 microns is more like fine new born baby hair). Dr.Gho actually had similar results. I believe, with all the work put into this method, the upper limit of its success is 18% new hairs over 30 microns, and most likely 1% or less hairs over 60 microns although that number has never been given.

 

[somone uk]

there are 2 different HM methods with their own advantages and disadvantages
i can't say 1 method is better than the other because they both had their advantages and disadvantages
histogen is cheaper and better for battling early hairloss, it's less labour intensive and it is thought to work on other causes of male pattern baldness
Andreans is more expensive but permanent

taking into account that histogen willl (from what i have read) be able to greatly undercut ARI in cost i can see ARI only working to serve an esoteric market compared to histogen
by the time any of this gets onto the market merk will lose their patent and therefore finasteride will be as cheap as smarties
the problem with histogen is when you get it you will be slowly losing the hair you gain so it might be wise to have histogen complemented with finasteride
so i can see histogen haveing the majority market with male pattern baldness and AA (and other alopecia) sufferers using histogen and ARI haveing a small percentage of people who have finasteride sides or rich people who just want to forget about hairloss

 

[andrei_eremenko]

yea...I bet on histogen rather than aderans...the results from preclinical trial( so pay attention! just preclinical trial - they are not even in the 1 phase ) are more than ok...with good density showing after 3 months...I even consider that this will be able to grow back the hair on a bald scalp...based on their results of trials.

 

[somone uk]

hmm adreans seems to have delivered better results

histogen 12 week:
+ 22.4% Total hair count
+ 27.8% Terminal hair count
(given no information about Vellous hair)

Adreans 12 weeek:
+62% Total hair count
+79% Terminal hair count
+50% Vellous hair count

since Terminal hair count is the name of the game adreans is more than twice as effective

since histogen is in fact cheaper it seems that you really will get what you pay for, i would say from these results i'll conclude that histogen is good early intervention however adreans is better for the late stages

 

[andrei_eremenko]

yea...but look at aderans pic...is a sleek bald scalp almost..and only that I am seeing is a few sparse hair...dunno what to think...

 

[Matt Skiba]

Pictures are only an example of one patient, the data is supposed to be of all the patients overall.

In any case, I wonder if it will be possible to actually have both treatments with results that will complement each other, since they're both not the same exact thing and are supposed to work in different ways. Kind of like how minoxidil and finasteride complement each other.

 

[Vanzzzz]

One thing though. Aderans classified terminal hair as those >30 microns. Is that an accurate representation?

 

[andrei_eremenko]

i know that over 0.60 it is a terminal hair...

 

[somone uk]

One thing though. Aderans classified terminal hair as those >30 microns. Is that an accurate representation?

from what i read there i much variation on a terminal hair diameter
from 15 microns to over 100
if you have a laser handy you could measure the diameter of your own hair using principles behind Double slit experiment

 

[andrei_eremenko]

it doesn't matter the hair diameter...some people have thinner some people thicker...but what is more important is to have hair...and we don't even know that one of this company could restore a bald guy to a norwood 2 or 1...

 

[Innermind]

it doesn't matter the hair diameter...some people have thinner some people thicker...but what is more important is to have hair...and we don't even know that one of this company could restore a bald guy to a norwood 2 or 1...

it does matter. 15 microns are little velus hairs. 30 microns more like thin wispy baby hairs, 60 microns is typically the thinnest acceptable hair, you see it in thin blonde caucasian hair. 120 microns is like thick balck asian hair. So yeah, it really does matter the hair diameter.


Adreans produced some really promising phase two trail results, at 3 months and it probably will be more at 6 months and 1 year evaluation, but this was phase II after a decade of studying, failures, blood sweat and tears. Becuase of this, my bet is still with histogen(or at least histogens product will be more effective), as their 1 year PRE CLINICAL trial evaluation resulted in 73.61% increase in hair count, as opposed to -15% for the placebo group. Remember that was only a pre clinical result. Who knows how high that number will be when they actually try to see how good their product can be with dosage minipulation.


Eitherway, Im up for both products being out on the market at the same time(2013-2015 ideally)...... this will mean cheaper options for us as a consumer, which is the most important. We do not want a monopoly, especially in bosley's hands, they will fist f*** the sh*t out of the consumer and you know it.