4 citations
,
November 2020 in “Journal of Cosmetic Dermatology”
This study found that Facebook hair loss treatment content is primarily advertisement-driven and seldom supported by medical evidence, with user engagement being generally low for evidence-based posts.
September 2023 in “Medicina Estética Revista Científica de la Sociedad Española de Medicina Estética (SEME)”
This research reported that the FDAapproved Litfulo® (ritlecitinib) as the first oral treatment for severe alopecia areata in adolescents over 12 years old, with 23% of treated patients showing significant hair regrowth in clinical trials compared to 1.6% with placebo.
This review reports that while current treatments for non-scarring alopecia, like minoxidil and finasteride, have limited efficacy due to side effects, natural remedies may offer more effective management with potentially fewer side effects, though their varying safety profiles call for further investigation.
May 2025 in “Italian Journal of Dermatology and Venereology”
This review examines existing studies on male androgenetic alopecia treatments, recommending topical minoxidil and oral finasteride as primary options, without presenting new clinical findings.
Clascoterone 5% shows potential for hair thickening and darkening, especially when combined with treatments like finasteride. It may be a good alternative for those who experience side effects from other treatments.
PP405 is a potential hair loss treatment showing promising early results, with hopes for market release by 2028, but skepticism remains due to inconclusive data and past disappointments with similar products. Current treatments like Minoxidil and Finasteride have side effects, leading some to anticipate PP405 as a safer alternative, though its effectiveness compared to placebo is debated.
A new hair loss protocol using FDA-approved topical treatments targets eight pathways, potentially improving results by 60-75% compared to the standard 40-50% from oral minoxidil and finasteride. The protocol includes minoxidil, finasteride, tacrolimus, cetirizine, bimatoprost, lithium gluconate, losartan, melatonin, NAC, caffeine, and tretinoin, with a monthly cost of $35-50 in Mexico and $80-150 in the US.
Some people don't see results with FDA-approved hair loss treatments like finasteride or minoxidil due to underlying issues. The video suggests addressing these issues, especially if there are atypical symptoms or other health conditions.
The conversation discusses why there are no FDA-approved NSAAs like RU58841 on the market, despite their potential superiority to 5AR inhibitors like finasteride. It explores the effectiveness of treatments like Minoxidil, finasteride, and RU58841 for hair loss.
How does tofacitinib differ when used orally versus topically in hair loss treatment research?Oral tofacitinib acts on immune signalling throughout the body and has the stronger regrowth evidence in alopecia areata, alongside an FDA boxed warning; topical tofacitinib aims to act only on the scalp, but the human evidence is a handful of small compounded-formulation studies with no large randomized trial. Neither route is approved for hair loss, and regrowth generally reverses after treatment stops.
What is tofacitinib, and why is it discussed in relation to autoimmune-related hair loss such as alopecia areata?Tofacitinib is a prescription JAK inhibitor approved for rheumatoid arthritis, psoriatic arthritis and ulcerative colitis — not for alopecia areata. It is discussed for hair loss because a 2014 case report and a 2016 open-label trial reported regrowth in severe alopecia areata, but that use is off-label, the regrowth relapsed after stopping, and the drug carries an FDA boxed warning.
How does bimatoprost compare to minoxidil for hair regrowth?Minoxidil is FDA-approved for scalp hair loss and backed by decades of large trials; bimatoprost is approved only for eyelashes, and the published scalp evidence is limited to small short studies, so on the scalp it is off-label and experimental.