EGF
585.4
pg/mL
+2.8%
Follitrix average • 4/4 valid patientsIndependent analytical comparison • ELISA
More measured growth factors.
By the numbers.
Follitrix was evaluated against a reference GFC kit using quantitative ELISA analysis. Across the three usable growth-factor markers, Follitrix showed a higher measured concentration in the tested samples.
The comparison uses the final concentration tables, excludes out-of-range values from averages, and uses the most reliable dilution for each analyte.
+41.8%
Higher measured PDGF-BB concentrationFollitrix average vs. reference GFC kit • 4/4 patients validThe results
Follitrix measured higher across all three usable markers.
Reference-kit average is shown as 100%. The Follitrix value shows the measured concentration relative to that reference.
VEGF-A
140.5
pg/mL
+9.1%
Follitrix average • 4/4 valid patientsPDGF-BB
3,225.0
pg/mL
+41.8%
Follitrix average • 4/4 valid patientsRelative concentration index
| Analyte | Reference = 100% | Follitrix | Measured difference |
|---|---|---|---|
| EGF | 100.0% | 102.8% | +2.8% |
| VEGF-A | 100.0% | 109.1% | +9.1% |
| PDGF-BB | 100.0% | 141.8% | +41.8% |
* Differences are analytical concentration deltas versus the reference-kit average; they are not claims of clinical efficacy or treatment outcomes.
What was measured
Three markers. One clear analytical direction.
For the usable analytes, the Follitrix preparation measured above the reference average in every comparison.
+2.8%EGF vs reference
+9.1%VEGF-A vs reference
+41.8%PDGF-BB vs reference
Testing note
IGF-1 was not used in the comparison.
Most IGF-1 sample wells at the tested 1:5 and 1:10 dilutions fell below the assay's lowest non-zero standard. Because that dilution setup did not provide a reliable comparison, IGF-1 has been deliberately excluded rather than used as a marketing number.
Product comparison
Follitrix beside the reference.
The reference kit is intentionally shown as a blurred, non-branded comparator. Once you share the final product photographs, this section can use the actual images while keeping the manufacturer unidentified.
Inside the testing
From sample preparation to quantitative readout.
The supplied photographs document the comparative laboratory workflow, ELISA plates, sample handling and optical-density readings.
01
Sample preparation
GFC samples prepared for comparative analytical testing.
02
ELISA assay preparation
Standards, controls and samples prepared for the selected growth-factor assays.
03
Plate reading
Optical-density measurements captured from the assay plates.
04
4PL back-calculation
Four-parameter logistic standard curves used to convert corrected OD into concentration values.
Assay quality
Strong standard-curve fit.
All four tested analytes produced R² values above 0.995 for the standard curves. IGF-1 was subsequently excluded from the product comparison because the sample dilution was below the useful assay range.
0.9955EGF standard-curve R²
0.9979VEGF-A standard-curve R²
0.9997PDGF-BB standard-curve R²
Laboratory evidence
Testing documentation.
Selected photographs from the testing process. Click any image to view it larger.
Publication note
Measured concentration is not the same as clinical efficacy.
This page presents analytical laboratory findings from the tested samples. Before public release, the final version should identify the testing laboratory, assay kit/method, sample details, testing date and any required regulatory wording exactly as supported by the underlying report. The results should not be presented as proof of superior patient outcomes unless supported by appropriate clinical evidence.