What changed for Alopecia Areata
A plain English summary of what recently moved in the public data Voxsanity tracks for Alopecia Areata. Updated from government registries. Not medical advice.
How to read these changes: every figure on this page is the difference between two snapshots of what Voxsanity had tracked on each date. Voxsanity only began taking daily snapshots in July 2026 and is still ingesting the public registries, so a rise here is mostly our own coverage expanding rather than new research appearing. Read it as our tracked coverage growing, not as a claim about real-world research changing this fast: it overstates how much actually changed.
Comparing the two most recent snapshots, 27 July 2026 and 28 July 2026.
- Trials recruiting worldwide 77 to 78 (+1)
- Trials on record 582 to 579 (-3)
Newly subsidised on the PBS
No medicines were newly subsidised on the PBS for Alopecia Areata in July 2026. Voxsanity tracks 2 PBS-subsidised medicines for this condition; none of them was listed for the first time this month.
Source: Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme (PBS), © Commonwealth of Australia. Data used and redistributed under permission; not modified from its original wording where displayed verbatim.
Past updates
Tracking began in July 2026. Month on month changes will appear here once a second month of data has been recorded. Until then, the comparison above shows the most recent movement.
Recent trend
Weekly, most recent weeks (fills out to a monthly trend as history grows).
Recent trial results
Trials tracked for Alopecia Areata that have reported results to a public registry.
AI generated results summary. Written by an AI model from the official source data and checked on a sample basis. It can contain mistakes, so confirm anything important against the original source. How we use AI
-
NCT04006457 · results posted 14 August 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04006457) looked at a medicine called ritlecitinib over a long-term period. The main part of the study involved two groups of participants: 449 people who were new to the medicine (the "de novo" group) and 603 people who had already been taking it in an earlier study (the "roll-over" group). A smaller, separate part of the trial involved 17 participants and looked at how the body responds to certain vaccines — specifically a whooping cough/tetanus/diphtheria (Tdap) vaccine and a meningococcal vaccine — while taking ritleci...
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT05589610 · results posted 10 April 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at a treatment called EQ101 in people with moderate to severe alopecia (significant hair loss). A total of 36 people started the trial, 30 people completed it, and 6 did not finish. The trial was measuring how many participants experienced side effects or unwanted health events that arose during treatment (called "treatment emergent adverse events"), as well as several other things including changes in hair loss scores, how the body processed the drug, and how the drug interacted with its biological target in the body....
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
-
NCT05556265 · results posted 28 February 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT05556265) looked at a medicine called deucravacitinib in people with alopecia areata — a condition where the immune system attacks hair follicles, causing hair loss. A total of 94 participants took part in the first 24-week phase: 32 received deucravacitinib once a day (called QD), 31 received it twice a day (called BID), and 31 received a placebo (an inactive treatment). The trial's main measurement for hair loss used a tool called the SALT score, which runs from 0 to 100 — where a lower number means less hair loss on the...
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗
-
NCT05332366 · results posted 7 February 2025
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT05332366) involved 35 participants in total. They were split into three groups: 15 people received delgocitinib (the medicine being studied), 15 received a placebo (a dummy treatment with no active ingredient), and 5 received no treatment at all. All 35 participants completed the study. The trial was measuring changes in the levels of three immune-system chemical messengers — CXCL9, CXCL10, and IFN-γ — in the skin over 12 weeks. These proteins play a role in how the immune system sends signals. The reported data shows tha...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT04019795 · results posted 5 September 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 160 people in total across four groups. Three groups used different settings of an active light-emitting cap device called REVIAN, while a fourth group used a non-active (sham) version of the cap that did not emit the treatment light — this sham group is sometimes called a "control" group, meaning it was used as a comparison point. The trial was measuring changes in the number of terminal hairs (the thicker, more visible hairs on the scalp) over 16 weeks, using standardised photographs reviewed by independent observer...
-
NCT04556734 · results posted 26 June 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at a medicine called etrasimod in people with alopecia areata, a condition that causes patchy hair loss on the scalp. The main thing the trial was measuring was the change in scalp hair loss over 24 weeks, using a tool called SALT I — a scoring system where 0 means no scalp hair loss and 100 means complete scalp hair loss. A total of 80 participants took part in the first, double-blind phase of the trial (where neither participants nor researchers knew who was getting which treatment): 31 received etrasimod 2 mg, 25 rec...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT03899259 · results posted 14 May 2024
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03899259) enrolled 606 participants across three groups in its first phase: 173 received a placebo (a dummy treatment with no active ingredient), 174 received a 2 mg daily dose of baricitinib, and 259 received a 4 mg daily dose of baricitinib. The trial was measuring changes in hair loss in people with alopecia areata — a condition where the immune system attacks hair follicles. The main thing being measured was a scalp hair loss score called SALT, where a lower score means less hair loss, and the goal was to see how many...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT04517864 · results posted 28 December 2022
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT04517864) looked at a medicine called ritlecitinib compared to a placebo (an inactive dummy treatment) in a total of 71 participants across the main placebo-controlled phase — 36 received ritlecitinib and 35 received placebo. The trial was measuring changes in a hearing brain-wave test called a Brainstem Auditory Evoked Potential (BAEP), which records how quickly sound signals travel from the ear through the brainstem. Specifically, it tracked a timing measurement called the I–V interwave latency — essentially, how long (i...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT03732807 · results posted 24 February 2022
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03732807) enrolled 718 adults across seven treatment groups to study a medicine called ritlecitinib (also known as PF-06651600) for alopecia areata — a condition that causes patchy or complete hair loss on the scalp. Participants were assigned to receive different doses of ritlecitinib (some starting on a higher "loading" dose before dropping to a lower maintenance dose), or a placebo (a dummy treatment with no active ingredient). The trial ran in two stages: up to 24 weeks, then a further extension to 48 weeks. The main t...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT02494297 · results posted 27 August 2021
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 1,597 participants, all of whom were in a single group receiving a combination medication containing cyproterone acetate and ethinyl estradiol. All 1,597 participants who started the study also completed it, with none recorded as dropping out. The trial was designed to look at how doctors were actually prescribing this medication in practice — that is, which conditions they were prescribing it for and how it was being used in the real world. The reported data shows that the primary outcome measured was the "drug util...
-
NCT03467412 · results posted 3 December 2020
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial tested a treatment called FOL-005 for hair growth on the scalp. A total of 120 people took part across five groups: four groups received different doses of FOL-005 (0.00625 µg, 0.025 µg, 0.050 µg, and 0.100 µg — µg meaning micrograms, a very small unit of measurement), and one group of 20 people received a placebo (an inactive treatment used for comparison). The trial ran for 12 weeks, and the main thing being measured was the change in the total number of hairs per square centimetre of scalp from the start of the trial to the...
-
NCT02974868 · results posted 26 May 2020
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial looked at two investigational medicines — PF-06651600 and PF-06700841 — compared to a placebo (an inactive treatment) in people with alopecia areata, a condition that causes patchy or complete hair loss on the scalp. A total of 142 people took part in the first 24-week treatment stage: 48 received PF-06651600, 47 received PF-06700841, 24 received a placebo matched to PF-06651600, and 23 received a placebo matched to PF-06700841. The trial then continued into two further stages — a single-blind extension and a cross-over extens...
Read the full trial page · View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT03488108 · results posted 8 April 2020
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial involved 20 participants who were split into two groups of 10. It was a "crossover" trial, meaning everyone tried both treatments — platelet rich plasma (PRP, a substance made from a person's own blood) and minoxidil foam (a topical scalp treatment) — one after the other, with a two-month break in between. The trial was measuring changes in hair over 12 weeks for each treatment, looking at things like total hair count, the number of fine (vellus) hairs, the number of thicker (terminal) hairs, and the overall thickness of hairs...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT03753113 · results posted 16 March 2020
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT03753113) involved 24 people in total — 12 in a treatment group and 12 in a control group. All 24 participants completed the study, with no dropouts recorded. The trial was measuring changes in hair diameter (thickness) over time, along with how satisfied participants felt about their hair growth, and how many participants experienced unwanted side effects such as itching, redness, or inflammation. The reported data shows that hair diameter, measured in micrometres (millionths of a metre), was recorded at what appear to b...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT02503852 · results posted 13 January 2020
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02503852) enrolled 71 people across four groups to study a treatment for hair loss involving fat tissue and cells called ADRCs (adipose-derived regenerative cells). Participants were placed into one of four groups: a high-dose ADRC plus fat group (16 people), a low-dose ADRC plus fat group (22 people), a fat-alone group (24 people), and a no-fat control group (9 people). Not everyone completed the trial — 60 of the 71 who started finished the study. The reported data shows that the primary outcome measured was the number...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT01898806 · results posted 6 June 2019
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT01898806) enrolled 11 participants, all placed into a single group. The study was measuring how well a treatment could encourage hair regrowth in people with a condition affecting hair loss. The main thing researchers were looking to track was the proportion of participants who responded to treatment — defined as achieving at least 50% regrowth (measured using a scoring system called the SALT score) by week 24. Eleven people started the trial, eight completed it, and three did not finish. The reported data shows that no n...
-
NCT01950780 · results posted 7 May 2019
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT01950780) enrolled 12 participants, all of whom completed the study — none dropped out. All participants received a medicine called ruxolitinib. The trial was measuring changes in hair loss on the scalp using a scoring tool called the SALT score (Severity of Alopecia Tool). This score runs from 0 (no hair loss) to 100 (complete hair loss on the scalp), with a lower number meaning less hair loss. The reported data shows three SALT score measurements recorded during the study for the ruxolitinib group: 65.8, 24.8, and 7.3....
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT02197455 · results posted 4 April 2017
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 30 participants, all of whom completed the study with no drop-outs. All participants received tofacitinib. The trial was measuring changes in hair loss severity using a tool called the SALT score (Severity of Alopecia Tool), where a score of 0 means no hair loss and 100 means complete hair loss. It also measured how much the condition affected participants' quality of life using a questionnaire called the Skindex-16, where 0 means "not bothered at all" and 100 means "always bothered." The reported data shows that, on...
View reported results on ClinicalTrials.gov ↗ · Linked publication on PubMed ↗
-
NCT02014584 · results posted 8 March 2017
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial (NCT02014584) enrolled 117 participants across two main groups — 59 received a placebo (inactive treatment) and 58 received dutasteride 0.5 mg. The trial ran in stages: a 24-week "double-blind" phase (where neither participants nor doctors knew who received which treatment), followed by a 24-week "open-label" phase (where everyone received dutasteride and knew they were doing so), and a small follow-up period for some participants. The trial was primarily measuring how many participants experienced adverse events (unexpected m...
-
NCT00484679 · results posted 20 June 2014
According to the results reported on ClinicalTrials.gov, this trial enrolled 18 people, all of whom received injections of a medication called Kenalog-10 (triamcinolone acetonide) directly into the scalp as a treatment for alopecia areata — a condition that causes patchy hair loss. Fifteen participants completed the trial, while three did not finish. The study was measuring whether these injections had any effect on the body's cortisol levels (cortisol is a natural hormone produced by the body, often associated with stress responses) over a 24-week period. Participants received four injections...
These are the results as reported to the registry, not medical advice. Verify independently with the trial site and discuss what they mean for you with your doctor.
What is coming
AI generated pipeline summary. Written by an AI model from the official source data and checked on a sample basis. It can contain mistakes, so confirm anything important against the original source. How we use AI
According to NIH funding data, a small amount of public research funding is currently being directed toward Alopecia Areata, and the level has remained broadly steady from year to year. This suggests the condition holds a consistent place in the public research agenda, though it has not seen a sharp surge in government-backed scientific interest. For patients, a steady funding level means that fou...
See the full Alopecia Areata page
Not medical advice. Voxsanity republishes public government health data in plain English. These figures describe research and registry activity, not the suitability of any treatment for any person. Trial status can change; always verify current status directly with the trial site and confirm Australian availability with your doctor.