Ruxolitinib and Tofacitinib Could Also Regrow Hair in AGA

Last Year: Ruxolitinib and Tofacitinib for Alopecia Areata

Last year, by far the biggest news of the year involved two likely cures for alopecia areata (AA) in humans. One was the arthritis drug tocafitinib and the other was the cancer drug ruxolitinib. Both drugs are classified as Janus kinase (JAK) inhibitors, and it is likely that many other drugs from this family will lead to similar results when it comes to hair regrowth. If you read my two main posts on this subject from last year (see here and here), it should be quite obvious how exciting the news was based on the large-scale global media coverage at the time (and of course the miraculous before and after human scalp photos instead of the usual mice photos).

Unfortunately, the vast majority of men (and many women too) who have hair loss suffer from androgenic alopecia, also known as male pattern baldness (MPB). There are probably at least 50 times as many people who suffer from MPB as there are who suffer from alopecia areata. So the big news of last year was only useful to 2 percent of hair loss sufferers, at least for the time being.

While many people (including the famous Dr. George Cotsarelis) dismissed the potential for JAK inhibitors to work on people who have androgenic alopecia, I was not so pessimistic. In my posts from last year, I mentioned that MPB probably also had an immune system attack/inflammatory component to it (and JAK inhibitors seem to cure alopecia areata via stopping the immune system from attacking the follicles). My theory was partly due to the fact that I and numerous others get a lot of itching and dandruff while losing hair (especially if not using shampoos such as Nizoral).

I was therefore very surprised that Dr. Cotsarelis was dismissing these developments so fast. It should be noted that all of his decades of work and numerous patents could go down the drain if JAK inhibitors were to cure MPB in humans without any major side effects, since this is one rare area of hair loss research that Dr. Cotsarelis has never touched.

Strangely enough, the two teams that discovered the cure for alopecia areata last year were both based in New York. One was led by Dr. Angela Christiano and the other was led by Dr. Brett King. The latter has credited the former with being the pioneer in this work.

My biggest reason for keeping faith in the potential of JAK inhibitors to also work on people with male pattern hair loss was the Bald Truth interview with Dr. Brett King. In the video, Dr. King mentions that a topical formulation of Tofacitinib would likely be tested on patients with Androgenic Alopecia. He clearly felt that JAK inhibitors could perhaps work on MPB patients too.

If I had to rate the chances of a hair loss cure for MPB arising from JAK inhibitors after that interview from last year, I would have said 3/10. After the below groundbreaking developments of today, I will raise my rating to 5/10. The one big issue is whether these drugs can regrow hair that has been lost for more than several years. Also an issue is long-term side effects, but so far the oral JAK inhibitors do not seem to have caused any deaths. And the topical version of those inhibitors will likely lead to even fewer side effects.

Today: Ruxolitinib and Tofacitinib for Androgenetic Alopecia

Lo and behold, today Dr. Angela Christiano and her team published some findings that suggest a better than negligible chance of JAK inhibitors also working to treat androgenic alopecia. This time, they managed to grow hair on rats via a topical formulation of both Ruxolitinib and Tofacitinib. Below are the stunning pictures, albeit in mice this time. However, it should be noted that they also grafted human hair onto the mice and achieved great results.

Image below from this Daily Mail article:

Ruxolitinib and Tofacitinib Hair Growth
Ruxolitinib and Tofacitinib JAK inhibitor spurred hair regrowth in mice.

Some key quotes from Dr. Christiano per various articles from today:

“Male pattern hair loss follicles are stuck in the same state where these drugs seem to work.”

“What we’ve found is promising, though we haven’t yet shown it is effective for male pattern baldness.”

“JAK inhibitors seem to be among the very few number of compounds that produce hair growth very soon after their application.”

“But applying such drugs topically would be far safer.”

“Delivering it on the skin also seems to get more of the drug into the hair follicles.”

“Some topical agents induce tufts of hair here and there after a few weeks, but very few have such a powerful and rapid-acting effect.”

JAK Inhibitors Might Directly Affect Hair Follicles

The most interesting part of these experiments was that the mice grew more hair when the drug was applied topically to their skin versus when it was given to them to take internally. The research team thinks that this implies that JAK inhibitors might have a direct effect on hair follicles, in addition to the already known effect of inhibiting the immune attack. It should be noted that the precise terminology for this whole mechanism is “pharmacological inhibition of the JAK-STAT pathway/signaling”, with the STAT standing for “signal transducer and activator of transcription .”

JAK Inhibitors and Dermal Papilla Cells

I also found it interesting that the full published study has the following quote in the Abstract:

“We show that JAK inhibition regulates the activation of key hair follicle populations such as the hair germ and improves the inductivity of cultured human dermal papilla cells by controlling a molecular signature enriched in intact, fully inductive dermal papillae.”

A huge amount of hair loss research entails dermal papilla cells. I am not a scientist, but it seems like the above findings could also have ramifications for companies involved in 3D culturing of dermal papilla cells. In fact one of the co-authors of today’s groundbreaking paper is renowned hair loss researcher Dr. Claire Higgins, who has done quite a bit of work on 3D culturing of dermal papilla cells.

Vixen Pharmaceuticals

According to the NBC article on this development:

Columbia University has filed patent applications relating to the discoveries reported in this paper, which are being commercialized through Vixen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., of which Dr. Christiano is a founder.

This is interesting since some months ago I mentioned the fact that Dr. Christiano was supposedly starting a new company named “Rapunzel”. Perhaps she will have two companies devoted to curing hair loss: one for pharmaceuticals and one for work related to hair cloning and hair multiplication (i.e., cell culturing, stem cells etc…)?

I find this development encouraging since it makes more sense for Dr. Christiano to start a company devoted to this treatment only if she feels there could be at least some benefit to people suffering from MPB. Otherwise, she only has a market of at most 2 percent of balding people who have alopecia areata. And even that market would be split with other companies and doctors such as Dr. King that might make their own topical version of a different JAK inhibitor.

Videos

— The video from CBS does not embed very well in correct size, but is worth watching.

— Also see the video from Columbia University.

How to Get Cheap Blood Tests

It is a shame that the vast majority of people who take Finasteride or Dutasteride to combat their hair loss never get blood tests to measure their hormone levels pre-medication and post-medication. I am one of those people and wish that I had kept an annual log of my various hormone levels while I have been taking Finasteride 1.25 mg once every two days for a majority of the past ten or so years. There is no guarantee that these medications are always working, and there have been some recent rumors that certain generic versions of Finasteride reduce DHT levels less then non-generic versions.

The main reasons that people do not bother to measure their hormone levels regularly are 1) laziness/inconvenience and 2) the expensive nature of these tests. For example, some years ago I asked my doctor how much a blood test to measure my DHT, estrogen and testosterone levels would cost, and the answer was a combined $500 for the three tests. In addition, you have to pay another $100-200 just to see a doctor so that he/she can then refer you to some expensive affiliated lab for a blood test. Total ripoff.

For people taking finasteride or dutasteride, the hormones to focus on when getting blood tests are (top 3 = the most pertinent):

  1. Dihydrotestosterone (DHT)
  2. Estrogen — various ways of measuring
  3. Testosterone — various ways of measuring
  4. Follicle-Stimulating Hormone (FSH)
  5. Luteinizing Hormone (LH)

In most cases, your testosterone and estrogen levels should not change drastically from taking finasteride or dutasteride. But some people do get unlucky with major swings in the numbers.

Cheap Blood Tests

Luckily, blood test prices are no longer that high if you decide to avoid the doctor and the hospital lab and instead go to private walk-in facilities or purchase kits that you mail back with your blood drawn at home. Some of the below listed places might not have locations in your city, and some might not be reviewed online as frequently as you desire, but it is still worth checking them out.

If you have any kind of esoteric medical problem, your 1,000 plus hours of internet research and internet forum participation oftentimes makes you far more of an expert in that particular condition than a family doctor.

LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics: A Duopoly

In the US, by far the two largest companies offering diagnostic lab services are LabCorp (LH) and Quest Diagnostics (DGX). Typically, when your doctor sends you to get a blood test at a local facility, your drawn blood is then sent to one of the above two companies for analysis.

However, there are now much cheaper options if you avoid the doctor from the get go. Moreover, Elizabeth Holmes and her company Theranos will change the whole game entirely if things go as planned (see second section below).

Walk-In Clinics Where You Can Get Low-Cost Blood Tests

Below are some examples of clinics in the US that offer blood tests that are significantly cheaper than at regular labs. Unfortunately, most of the below places still end up using the services of LabCorp and Quest Diagnostics. However, at least its a lot cheaper this way than going via your doctor’s referral. Some of the below have special offers every month.

LifeExtension –> DHT test = $50

Walkinlab –> DHT test = $97

Directlabs –> DHT test = $97

Anylabtestnow

Elizabeth Holmes and Theranos: A Revolution in Blood Testing

A few months before I wrote about BioViva’s Elizabeth (Liz) Parrrish, I had been contemplating writing about Elizabeth Holmes of Theranos fame, but never got to it till today (although I did cover Theranos as part of several monthly “Brief Items of Interest” posts). Ms. Holmes founded Theranos in 2003 at the age of 19. The company has developed a way to extract just a few drops of your blood from your finger via pinpricks and then conduct over 240 blood tests (and counting) on those few blood drops.

Moreover, via a partnership Theranos has now started offering these tests at Walgreens’ Wellness Centers in select parts of the US, and will expand nationwide and then internationally in the near future. These tests will generally costs a fraction of what they cost at the labs I discussed earlier. Moreover, since Walgreens is omnipresent in the US, we are not far from a time when every single one of us can get a blood test for cheap with just some pin pricks right at our next door Walgreens. This will represent a medical revolution.

The Battle of the Liz’s

Ms. Holmes has garnered 1,000s of times more publicity and media coverage in the US compared to Ms. Parrish, although the former has been in the news for a significantly longer time than the latter. Ms. Holmes has managed to get numerous ex-politicians on her company (Theranos)’s board of directors, giving her influence that Ms. Parrish can only dream about. The most famous of these ex-politicians is Henry Kissinger. Interestingly, while Ms. Parrish is a vegetarian, Ms. Holmes is a vegan.

While Ms. Parrish has a bachelor’s degree related to Biology (and she has been criticized for not having any further advanced degree), Ms. Holmes is a Stanford University dropout from the Chemical Engineering program. Ms. Holmes has become the world’s youngest self-made female billionaire (current net worth estimated at $4.6 billion), while Ms. Parrish is probably not even a millionaire yet. Both are female CEOs, a rarity. Both are very well spoken and photogenic, the latter of which is unfortunately often a bit too important for success in the western world.

In the long run, what Ms. Parrish is doing is far more important than what Ms. Holmes is doing, but the only problem is that there is a decent chance that Ms. Parrish’s gene therapy procedures might not work, or even worse, could be banned if someone dies during the initial human experiments. Especially if other semi-medically knowledgeable qualified professionals start recklessly following Ms. Parrish’s example with dangerous untested therapies.

Nevertheless, it is absolutely wonderful that Ms. Parrish could likely accelerate the start of an era in which humans taking their healthcare and their bodies into their own hands and ignore the government (or find ways to bypass the government — e.g., get things done in Colombia or Congo or preferably Japan in the near future).

On the other hand, what Ms. Holmes is doing is far more likely to work and has in fact already been proven to pass government requirements in several cases. Due to the company’s stealth mode operations, things are not entirely clear as yet, but my intuition tells me that the company’s proprietary technology works.

Theranos: A Week of Bad Publicity

The biggest problem with Theranos has been that it is extremely secretive as to how its technology works. Since the company is currently privately held, it has been able to largely get away with this — until this week when the Wall Street Journal published a critical article on Theranos, accusing the company of not using its technology for many of the tests, as well as implying a number of other issues with the company. Elizabeth Holmes was not pleased with this, and strongly defended her company yesterday. Virtually all major media has been covering this story, including the New York Times.

My feeling is that Theranos will get through these difficulties. It already has one blood test (Herpes Simplex) cleared by the FDA, and is hoping to get 120 others approved in the near future.

Unfortunately, while Theranos currently offers Estrogen and Testosterone blood tests, it offers no DHT blood tests.