QR 678 & QR678 Neo Vs PRP A Randomised, Comparative, Prospective Study

Abstract
Background: Hair plays a significant role in shaping the appearance of an individual.
Loss of hair can lead to serious effects on social esteem of an individual. The most
common cause of hair loss is Androgenetic Alopecia (AGA).This hereditary disorder fol-
lowed a specific pattern causing progressive thinning of hair in both Men and Women.

Aims: The aim of the current study is to compare and evaluate the efficacy of QR678
therapy versus PRP in the treatment of Male Androgenetic Alopecia. Since QR678
and QR678 Neo have been found to be formulations equivalent in efficacy, the re-
sults would be the same with either formulation.

Methods: A prospective, comparative, single-blind study was carried out with 2
groups of 25 patients each. Intradermal injections of QR678 formulations and PRP
were injected in group A and B respectively. Hair pull test, Video microscopic assess-
ment, Global Photographic assessment was done and patient’s subjective assessment
was done through questionnaire at the end of the study. Results were evaluated after
6 months and follow up was done till 1 year.

Results: 100% reduction in hair fall was noted at the end of 6 months in the QR678
group which was maintained for 1 year. Video microscopic evaluation showed that the
hair density, terminal hair density, vellus hair density and shaft diameter were signifi-
cantly better in QR678 group (P < .005) than the PRP group.Since QR678 and QR678
Neo formulatons are equivalent in efficacy, the results of tthis trial can be attributed to
be the same, irrespective of the formulation used.

Conclusion: The bioengineered formulation of QR678 proved to be more beneficial
for Male Androgenetic Alopecia (Male pattern hair loss) compared to PRP. A com-
parative study between QR678 and PRP with long term follow-up will widen our
spectra of knowledge.

For full article open PDF