Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

stststststststs t1_irh1375 wrote

Reply to comment by SlouchyGuy in A skin graft using sticky mussel "feet" proteins heals without scars by dazosan

Yeah, as someone who has only followed Verteporfin at a surface level since seeing that paper last year, I second the confusion as why using it for scars has been such a slow process, especially considering its already approved in humans.

8

kagamiseki t1_irh50kb wrote

A potential issue is that verteporfin is a photosensitizer.

One of it's current usages is to cause controlled local tissue damage, to destroy or modulate proliferative lesions. It's given as an IV infusion, for a few minutes, followed by controlled application of light, then patients have to stay out of sunlight and bright indoor lighting for several days. Treated lesions may scar afterwards.

It's approved, and it may be useful for this purpose, but it definitely isn't completely benign, and doesn't necessarily eliminate scarring either. It's not clear how much would need to be given, how long it would need to be given for, and whether applying it topically or locally would be sufficient. If it turns out to need prolonged IV treatment, perhaps it could cause blindness as it circulates around the eyes and gets activated by screens, sunlight, and lighting.

What would be the potential risks of longer treatment? How long would it stick around in the tissue/blood? How much risk would there be of activation by light penetration into the skin? These are all questions that cost a lot of money to answer, and the answers could be deal-breakers.

It's promising, but it's not a harmless miracle drug.

23

Beneficial_Cobbler46 t1_irya3oj wrote

Right. if it ends up working but treated people need to live in the dark for 2 weeks, it'll end up only being used for serious issues for which that level of inconvience and risk is worth it.

1