Table 4.
Units | Parameter |
MPHL (n = 7) Group topical |
MPHL | MPHL on‐topical | Controls | MPHL as % of normals | |||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
No‐treatment | Change m3 vs m0 | Normal males (n = 33) | At m0 | At m3 | |||||||
Baseline (m0) | P | Baseline | Fin + MTS | ||||||||
Mean | SD | ABS | Mean | SD | |||||||
n/cm2 | Nano‐hair <20 µm | MTS‐5% | 35 | 26 | −8 | 26 | 4 | 4 | 944 | 716 | |
n/cm2 | Anagen ≥20 µm | MTS‐5% | 129 | 65 | 81 | *** | 210 | 227 | 47 | 57 | 93 |
Telogen ≥20 µm | MTS‐5% | 105 | 36 | −33 | * | 71 | 37 | 23 | 281 | 192 | |
n/cm2 | Anagen ≥30 µm | MTS‐5% | 109 | 62 | 69 | ** | 177 | 221 | 47 | 49 | 80 |
Telogen ≥30 µm | MTS‐5% | 67 | 40 | −14 | 53 | 32 | 23 | 207 | 163 | ||
n/cm2 | Anagen ≥40 µm | MTS‐5% | 82 | 57 | 58 | ** | 140 | 206 | 40 | 40 | 68 |
Telogen ≥40 µm | MTS‐5% | 35 | 20 | −5 | * | 30 | 25 | 21 | 137 | 118 | |
n/cm2 | Anagen ≥50 µm | MTS‐5% | 68 | 51 | 44 | ** | 112 | 189 | 33 | 36 | 59 |
Telogen ≥50 µm | MTS‐5% | 21 | 11 | −5 | * | 16 | 22 | 20 | 95 | 73 | |
n/cm2 | Exogen | MTS‐5% | 10 | 5 | 0 | 10 | 1 | 1 | 792 | 769 | |
LHGR | Hair diameter (D; µm) | ||||||||||
µm/24 h | 30 µm ≤ D <60 µm | MTS‐5% | 256 | 53 | 19 | 275 | 319 | 32 | 80 | 86 | |
µm/24 h | D ≥ 60 µm | MTS‐5% | 369 | 39 | −65 | 305 | 380 | 34 | 97 | 80 |
At baseline, the anagen hair densities (bold) ranged from 57% to 36% of controls, while telogen densities ranged from 281% to 95% depending on the diameter categories (from ≥20 µm till ≥50 µm). Nano‐hair and exogen hair counts exceeded 7‐fold control values (respectively, 944% and 792%). When values recorded after 3 mo of combined drug treatment are displayed (last column) in regard to baseline performance of MPHL subjects, the therapeutic result (improvement) may seem encouraging (almost doubling of anagen for diameters including 20‐ and 30‐µm hair). However, taking into account only the terminal hair (diameter ≥50 µm), the persistent slow growth rates and the rather moderate changes of anagen/telogen, point to short duration of anagen which is disappointing from the clinical perspective. The trend for slowing down of LHGR in intermediate‐terminal hair (dropping from 97% of controls at baseline to 80% at m3) points towards reactivation of functionally deficient hair follicles. Therefore, new approaches are being developed aiming at an objective parameter that might have more consistent clinical relevance (see Figure 7 based on the methodology detailed in Figures 5 and 6).