Do Copper Peptides (GHK-Cu) Work After Menopause?

The short version

Nobody has tested copper peptides in women after menopause. The newest hair study stopped at age 40.

Skin collagen in postmenopausal women has been measured since 1987, when Brincat and colleagues put the decline at roughly 1% to 2% a year.¹ Hair has been counted as well, at 52.2% of 178 postmenopausal women in a 2022 clinic study.² Copper peptide serums are sold into exactly those two complaints. The newest human trial of one for hair ran 12 weeks in 18 people aged 18 to 40, on eyebrows, and published no figures.⁷

What actually changes in skin and hair after menopause?

The 1987 measurement covered more than skin. That is why it holds up.

Brincat and colleagues measured four things in postmenopausal women: thigh skin collagen content, skin thickness, forearm bone mineral content, and the metacarpal index, a measure of how thick the walls of a hand bone are relative to its width. All four declined by roughly 1% to 2% per year after menopause, and all four declined significantly against the number of years since menopause. The authors read the correlation between skin and bone as a sign that one process was driving both.¹ A separate paper from the same group measured thigh skin collagen and that same hand-bone index in 69 untreated postmenopausal women.⁴

A 2024 review of hormone therapy and skin aging puts the cumulative figure at a 45% decrease in skin collagen in untreated women fifteen years past menopause, attributing it to that work.⁵ The per-year figure is the sturdier of the two, since it comes from the measurement itself and not from a review summarizing it.

The figure you will meet most often online is different. "You lose 30% of your collagen in the first five years" appears across skincare marketing and health sites. It does not trace to a primary measurement in any source this page was able to open. The two primary figures above describe a slower curve, so those are the ones used here.

Hair has been counted too. The best single figure comes from a clinic population: a cross-sectional study of 200 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 65, of whom 178 were assessed, found female pattern hair loss in 52.2%, with a 95% confidence interval of 44.6 to 59.8. Mean age was 58.8 years and mean time since menopause was 9.2 years. Severity was mostly mild: 73.2% at Ludwig grade I, the earliest stage of the scale used to grade this kind of thinning, 22.6% at grade II and 4.3% at grade III.² Severity is the part usually dropped when the 52.2% gets quoted. Half of these women had hair loss, and three quarters of those had it at the mildest grade on the scale.

So the problem is real, it is common, and it has been quantified. The question is what copper peptides have to do with it.

Has any copper peptide study enrolled menopausal women?

No published human trial of GHK-Cu recruited on menopausal status, reported it, or analyzed its results by it.

Copper peptides reach a label as copper tripeptide-1, which is the INCI name printed on the ingredient list of every serum sold as one. The topical skin trials that get cited for this compound enrolled women in age bands that span menopause without recording which side of it anyone was on. An age range of 35 to 65 contains premenopausal women, women mid-transition and women a decade past it, and a result pooled across all three cannot tell you which group moved. Our comparison of GHK-Cu and Matrixyl covers what those trials found on their own terms.

A 2020 review of cosmeceuticals for estrogen-deficient skin, written specifically about this population, names two ingredients it considers supported by peer-reviewed work in menopausal skin. Peptides are not among them, and copper peptides are not discussed in it at all.⁶

That absence is not evidence that copper peptides fail in menopausal skin. It is evidence that nobody has looked.

Copper peptides, minoxidil or estrogen: which one has evidence here?

Three things get suggested for this. They sit at very different evidence levels.

Option	Evidence in women after menopause	What it is approved for
Copper peptides, sold as GHK-Cu or copper tripeptide-1	None. No trial recruited on menopausal status, reported it or analyzed by it	Nothing. It is a cosmetic ingredient
Minoxidil 5%, sold as Rogaine and as generics	Labeled for female pattern hair loss, the pattern most common in this group¹³	Regrowing hair on the top of the scalp, over the counter¹³
Topical estrogen	Plausible and partly supported for skin, on older and higher-dose studies⁵	Not a hair treatment
Systemic hormone therapy, HRT	No difference in wrinkle score at four years in the KEEPS skin substudy, p = 0.24⁶	Menopausal symptoms, not skin or hair

Read the middle column first, not the one on the right. Approval describes what a regulator has reviewed. The middle column is what somebody actually measured in women past this point. Copper peptides are blank there, and the blank is the whole finding on this page.

A fair word for the other side: the minoxidil label covers the top of the scalp and nothing else, so it does nothing for a receding frontal hairline,¹³ and the estrogen evidence for skin is older and used doses far above current prescribing.⁵⁶

Does your own GHK really fall with age?

The figure everyone quotes for that has no study behind it in any source this page could open.

The claim runs that human plasma holds about 200 ng/ml of GHK at age 20 and about 80 ng/ml by age 60, a fall of roughly 60%. It appears on product pages, in articles about the compound, and on its most-read reference page.³ On that reference page the two citations sitting beside the figure are a copper peptide company's own science page and a product listing. Neither is a study. No primary measurement of plasma GHK across age groups turned up anywhere this page was able to reach.

GHK was isolated from human plasma albumin in 1973 by Loren Pickart,³ who went on to found a company selling copper peptide skincare. Our guide on the three GHK-Cu products sets out how much of the wider published record traces back to the same person.

So the figure is unverified in the sources available here. A number repeated often enough to feel established is not the same as a number somebody measured, and this one does heavy work in marketing aimed at exactly the women reading this page.

What did the 2026 copper peptide eyebrow study find, and who was in it?

It reported more eyebrow hairs on the treated side in 18 people, none of whom could have been more than 40 years old.

The trial tested a 2% GHK-Cu serum against a control serum for eyebrow hypotrichosis, meaning eyebrows that are sparser than normal. It ran for 12 weeks in 18 healthy participants aged 18 to 40. Each person received the active serum on one eyebrow and the control on the other, so everyone acted as their own comparison. The abstract reports that hair count increased significantly from baseline on the treated side at p below 0.05, with no significant change on the control side, and that hair diameter, photographic assessment scores and participant satisfaction also improved. No serious adverse effects or allergic reactions were reported.⁷ Every one of those is a direction without a size.

The headline is the least informative part of that record.

The abstract contains no numbers. There is no baseline hair count, no week 12 count, no mean difference, no confidence interval and no effect size anywhere in it. "Significantly increased" with a p value and no magnitude tells you something probably moved and nothing about how much.

The age ceiling is 40. Everyone this page is about was excluded by the eligibility criteria.

The design is described two ways. The title calls the study vehicle-controlled, meaning the comparison serum contained everything except the active ingredient. The abstract calls it placebo-controlled. Those are not interchangeable terms, and the record does not resolve which it was.

The funding and conflict of interest statements are not on the journal's record page, and the full PDF did not load for me, so I cannot tell you who paid for it.⁷

Does an eyebrow result tell you anything about menopausal scalp hair?

Study design answers this before biology needs to.

The trial treated a different body site, in a different age group, for a different condition. Hypotrichosis in a 25-year-old is thin eyebrows. Female pattern hair loss in a 58-year-old is progressive thinning across the top of the scalp. It is graded on a scale built for that pattern, and the study above tied it to age, years since menopause and body mass index.² A positive result in the first says nothing testable about the second.

This page is not claiming that eyebrow and scalp follicles must behave differently. That would be its own assertion and it needs its own evidence. The point is narrower: an 18-person trial that excluded everyone over 40 and treated eyebrows cannot be read as a result about menopausal scalp hair, whatever it found.

Is your menopausal hair loss pattern loss, shedding, or scarring?

Three different problems produce hair loss around this age. Where and how the hair goes tells them apart.

Female pattern hair loss shows up as decreased density of scalp hair in the central area, with retention of the frontal hairline.⁸ It comes on gradually and it is the one the 52.2% figure above describes.²

Telogen effluvium is shedding across the whole scalp instead of thinning in one zone. People with it usually lose 150 to 400 hairs a day, and an event typically triggers the process three to six months before the shedding starts. It is potentially reversible once its cause is treated.⁸

Frontal fibrosing alopecia takes the frontal hairline itself, along with the eyebrows, and it scars.⁹¹⁰ The frontal hairline is the dividing line between it and pattern loss: pattern loss keeps that hairline, and this does not.

A clinical review of diffuse hair loss puts the first steps plainly. The clinician should evaluate thyroid function and exclude anemia, and hormonal screening can help detect perimenopausal changes and androgen excess.⁸ The cross-sectional study above measured TSH and hemoglobin alongside sex hormones in its own assessment of these women.²

Two of those three problems have a cause that can be found and treated, and one of them is scarring. A serum answers none of the three questions.

When is hair loss after menopause a reason to see a doctor first?

One cause of hair loss in this group destroys the follicle permanently.

Frontal fibrosing alopecia was described in 1997 as a frontal variant of lichen planopilaris in postmenopausal women.⁹ It is a cicatricial, or scarring, alopecia, meaning the follicle is replaced by scar tissue and the hair does not come back once the follicle is gone.¹¹ It is described in the dermatology literature as an increasingly common primary scarring alopecia,¹² and reports of it describe progressive hair loss along the scalp margin, the eyebrows and the axillae.¹⁰

That combination is the reason this section exists. Picture a woman past menopause losing her frontal hairline and her eyebrows at once. She buys an eyebrow serum for it. She may be putting a cosmetic on a scarring condition, during the window when treatment aimed at the inflammation could still protect the follicles she has left. The 1997 series also noted that hormone replacement therapy did not appear to influence the course of the alopecia,⁹ so neither the serum nor the HRT is the answer there.

Signs that make a dermatologist the right first stop:

hairline recession at the front and temples, instead of thinning across the crown
eyebrow loss alongside scalp loss
redness, scaling or itching at the hairline
small bumps on the forehead
any patch where the scalp looks smooth and shiny, with no visible follicle openings

A dermatologist can tell these apart on examination and with a biopsy. A serum cannot.

Does hormone therapy fix menopausal skin?

Evidence here splits by era. Newer and better-controlled studies find smaller effects than older ones.

Older work is encouraging. A 2024 review collects increases in skin collagen and dermal thickness from several trials of estrogen, some with testosterone. One placebo-controlled trial reported a 33% increase in dermal thickness after six months. Another reported a 6.49% increase in skin collagen over the same period.⁵ Both of those are six-month studies using estrogen doses far above anything prescribed now.

The best-controlled result points the other way. The skin substudy of the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study followed 116 women for four years on randomized hormone therapy or placebo. Total wrinkle score was not significantly different among treatment groups at any time point, at p equal to 0.24.⁶

Both readings can be partly right. The 2020 review notes that most of the older studies used estrogen doses around ten times those in current low-dose regimens, which would explain a real effect in the old data and a null result in the new.⁶ That leaves a split answer. Topical estrogen on skin has a plausible and partly supported effect. Modern systemic doses have not shown one for wrinkles across four years of randomized follow-up. Neither finding is about copper peptides.

For skin specifically, the 2020 review names two ingredients it considers supported by peer-reviewed work in estrogen-deficient skin: 4′-acetoxy resveratrol and equol, both of which act on estrogen receptors.⁶ Copper peptides are not among them, and are not discussed in that review at all. The absence is not a verdict against them. It reflects that the people reviewing this population's skin have had no copper peptide trials in this population to review.

What has actual evidence for hair in this group?

Minoxidil carries an over-the-counter approval for this exact problem.

Minoxidil 5% is sold over the counter with the stated purpose "hair regrowth treatment for women" and the stated use "to regrow hair on the top of the scalp". The label says results may occur at three months with once-daily use, and that some women need six months of use before seeing results.¹³ Top of the scalp is the limit of the claim, which fits the pattern that female pattern hair loss takes and does not cover a receding frontal hairline.

A prescriber has more options than the pharmacy shelf does, and the choice between them depends on a diagnosis. Our guide on talking to your doctor about peptides covers raising a compound you have read about without the conversation stalling.

Does it matter whether the copper peptide is a cream or an injection?

For this question the route changes nothing, because neither route has been tested in the population.

No published human randomized trial has evaluated injectable GHK-Cu for skin, hair or wound outcomes in anyone, at any age. Our guide on the three GHK-Cu products sets out that evidence base and the FDA's recorded concerns about the injectable form, and our guide on why the injectable burns covers what has been measured about the sting. Injecting a compound that has not been tested topically in menopausal women does not produce menopause-specific evidence faster.

Copper also has a ceiling that applies to everyone, and more product does not mean more benefit. That is covered on the three-products guide too.

What would a copper peptide trial in menopausal women need to show?

A trial would need the right people, the right measurement and enough time.

It would have to meet all of this:

postmenopausal women, recruited on menopausal status and staged for female pattern hair loss
a vehicle control, so the comparison serum contains everything but the active ingredient
scalp hair density and diameter counted by trichoscopy, which is magnified imaging of the scalp surface used to measure individual hairs
six months at minimum, since the minoxidil label allows six months before results in some women¹³

Numbers in the abstract would help too.

Nothing resembling that exists today. If it appears, this page changes.

Common questions

Do copper peptides work for menopausal skin?

Nobody has tested it. The trials people cite enrolled age bands that span menopause without recording who was past it, so none of them can say.

Does the 2026 copper peptide eyebrow study apply to me if I am postmenopausal?

No. It stopped at age 40, and it treated eyebrows.

What did the eyebrow study actually report?

Eyebrow hair count increased significantly from baseline on the side treated with a 2% GHK-Cu serum, at p below 0.05. No significant change appeared on the control side. Hair diameter, photographic assessment and participant satisfaction were also better on the treated side, with no serious adverse effects. No baseline counts, final counts, effect sizes or confidence intervals appear in the abstract.

How much collagen do you lose after menopause?

The primary measurements put the decline at roughly 1% to 2% per year, across skin collagen content, skin thickness, the metacarpal index and forearm bone mineral content. A 2024 review gives a cumulative 45% decrease in untreated women fifteen years past menopause. The widely repeated claim of 30% in the first five years did not trace to a primary measurement in the sources this page could open.

How common is hair loss after menopause?

In a cross-sectional study of 178 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 65, female pattern hair loss was present in 52.2%, with a 95% confidence interval of 44.6 to 59.8. Most cases were mild, with 73.2% at the earliest grade on the Ludwig scale. After adjusting for age and family history, only a body mass index of 25 or above remained significantly associated, at an adjusted odds ratio of 2.65.

Could my hair loss be something a serum cannot help?

Yes. Frontal fibrosing alopecia is a scarring alopecia seen mainly in postmenopausal women, in which the follicle is replaced by scar tissue and does not regrow. It is reported with hair loss along the scalp margin, the eyebrows and the axillae. Hairline recession at the front and temples, eyebrow loss, redness or itching at the hairline, forehead bumps, or smooth shiny patches with no visible follicle openings are all reasons to see a dermatologist before buying anything.

Does hormone therapy help menopausal skin?

The evidence is split by era and dose. Older trials using higher estrogen doses reported increases in dermal thickness and skin collagen, including 33% and 6.49% in two six-month placebo-controlled studies. The four-year skin substudy of the Kronos Early Estrogen Prevention Study, with 116 women on randomized hormone therapy or placebo, found no significant difference in total wrinkle score at any time point, at p equal to 0.24. A plausible explanation is that modern doses are roughly a tenth of the older ones.

Does GHK really decline with age?

The figure quoted for this, about 200 ng/ml of GHK in plasma at age 20 falling to about 80 ng/ml by age 60, did not trace to a primary measurement in any source this page could open. On the compound's most-read reference page, the two citations beside the figure are a copper peptide company's science page and a product listing. The claim is unverified here, which is not the same as disproved.

How do I know whether my hair loss is pattern loss or shedding?

They differ in where and how the hair goes. Female pattern hair loss reduces density in the central scalp while the frontal hairline stays put. Telogen effluvium sheds across the whole scalp, usually 150 to 400 hairs a day, and an event typically triggers it three to six months before the shedding starts. Shedding is potentially reversible once its cause is treated, which is one reason a diagnosis comes before a purchase.

What should be checked before I try anything for menopausal hair loss?

A clinical review of diffuse hair loss states that the clinician should evaluate thyroid function and exclude anemia, and that hormonal screening can help detect perimenopausal changes and androgen excess. The cross-sectional study of postmenopausal women cited on this page measured TSH and hemoglobin alongside sex hormones in its own assessment.

Do copper peptides have side effects?

The common one is skin irritation, and the other limit is copper itself, which the body can only handle so much of. Our guide on the three GHK-Cu products covers both, along with the reaction users call the copper uglies. Nothing in the published record points to a side effect specific to women after menopause.

How long do copper peptides take to work for hair?

No trial has measured that in this group. The one recent hair trial ran 12 weeks, in people aged 18 to 40, on eyebrows. For scale, the minoxidil label says results may appear at three months and that some women need six months of daily use before seeing any. Anything promising a timeframe for copper peptides on menopausal scalp hair is quoting a number nobody produced.

Are there before-and-after results for copper peptides and menopausal hair?

None from a trial. The 2026 study published photographic scores but no counts and no effect sizes, so there is no measured change to set beside a picture. Before and after photos sold with a serum are not trial data.

Is a copper peptide serum better than minoxidil for menopausal hair thinning?

Nobody has run that comparison. Minoxidil carries an over-the-counter label for this; copper peptides carry no approval for hair anywhere.

Should I consider injectable GHK-Cu instead of a cream for this?

No. No published human trial has tested injectable GHK-Cu for skin or hair at any age, so changing route changes nothing about the evidence.

Are copper peptides unsafe during menopause specifically?

Nothing in the published record suggests a menopause-specific hazard from topical use, and the topical safety record over decades is reassuring. The limits that apply are the ones that apply at any age: the total copper a body can handle, the skin reaction some people get, and the fact that a cosmetic cannot treat a scarring condition.

My perimenopause guide mentioned topical peptides. Is this the same thing?

Partly. That guide covers the whole peptide category in midlife. This one narrows to copper peptides, and to skin and hair.

Sources

Brincat M, Kabalan S, Studd JW, Moniz CF, de Trafford J, Montgomery J. A study of the decrease of skin collagen content, skin thickness, and bone mass in the postmenopausal woman. Obstet Gynecol. 1987 Dec;70(6):840-5. PMID 3120067. Tier: abstract read via the PubMed listing, full text not retrieved. The listing gives a decline "of between 1-2% per year after the menopause" and states that "All four parameters showed a decline that was significant when compared with the years from the menopause." The four parameters are skin collagen content, skin thickness, metacarpal index and forearm bone mineral content. The sample size is not shown on the listing and is not quoted here.
Chaikittisilpa S, Rattanasirisin N, Panchaprateep R, Orprayoon N, Phutrakul P, Suwan A, Jaisamrarn U. Prevalence of female pattern hair loss in postmenopausal women: a cross-sectional study. Menopause. 2022;29(4):415-420. DOI 10.1097/GME.0000000000001927. Tier: abstract read via two independent reproductions, at healio.com and ouci.dntb.gov.ua, which agree on every figure quoted here. The journal page was not retrieved. 200 postmenopausal women aged 50 to 65 recruited, 178 evaluated; mean age 58.8 ± 4.1 years; mean time since menopause 9.2 ± 5.6 years; female pattern hair loss in 52.2%, 95% CI 44.6 to 59.8; Ludwig grade I 73.2%, grade II 22.6%, grade III 4.3%; after adjustment for age and family history only BMI of 25 or above remained significant, adjusted OR 2.65, 95% CI 1.23 to 5.70. Assessed by standardized global photography in six views plus trichoscopy, with three dermatologists re-evaluating all photographs. The two reproductions differ on country: one names King Chulalongkorn Memorial Hospital in Thailand, the other does not state a country.
Copper peptide GHK-Cu. Wikipedia. en.wikipedia.org. Tier: read at source, and cited here as the location of a claim rather than as evidence for it. States that GHK-Cu in human plasma is "about 200 ng/ml at age 20" falling to "80 ng/ml" by age 60, and that Loren Pickart isolated the peptide from human plasma albumin in 1973. The two references attached to the age figure on that page are a copper-peptides.com science page and a product listing, neither of which is a primary measurement. No population study of plasma GHK by age was retrievable from any source this page tried, so the figure is reported here as unverified. Citing an encyclopedia entry is a deliberate choice: the point being made is about where the claim lives and what supports it.
Brincat M, Moniz CF, Kabalan S, Versi E, O'Dowd T, Magos AL, Montgomery J, Studd JW. Decline in skin collagen content and metacarpal index after the menopause and its prevention with sex hormone replacement. Br J Obstet Gynaecol. 1987 Feb;94(2):126-9. PMID 3828252. DOI 10.1111/j.1471-0528.1987.tb02338.x. Tier: citation read at source via the PubMed listing; the abstract was truncated on that listing at "The thigh skin collagen content and the metacarpal index were measured in 69 untreated postmenopausal women", and the publisher page and the individual PubMed record both refused retrieval. Only the sample size and what was measured are taken from it here.
Menopause and the effects of hormone replacement therapy on skin aging: a short review. Gynecological and Reproductive Endocrinology & Metabolism, issue 1, 2024. gremjournal.com. Tier: read at source. Gives a 45% decrease in skin collagen content in untreated postmenopausal women at 15 years post-menopause, attributed to Brincat et al. 1987; a 33% increase in dermal thickness after 6 months of combined equine estrogens in a double-blind placebo-controlled trial, attributed to Maheux et al. 1994; and a 6.49% increase in skin collagen after 6 months of oral cyclical HRT in a double-blind placebo-controlled study, attributed to Sauerbronn et al. 2000. The review's own reference list carries two entries with identical titles, authors and pages for the Brincat work, so the 45% figure may rest on a duplicated citation. The underlying papers for the 33% and 6.49% figures were not retrieved, and those figures are quoted here as the review reports them.
Menopause and the skin: old favorites and new innovations in cosmeceuticals for estrogen-deficient skin. Dermatology and Therapy, 2020. link.springer.com. Tier: read at source. Names 4′-acetoxy resveratrol and equol as the ingredients it considers supported by peer-reviewed in vitro and clinical work in estrogen-deficient menopausal skin. Peptides are not discussed in the text retrieved, and copper peptides are not mentioned at all. Quotes the KEEPS skin substudy (Owen et al., 2016, 116 subjects): "Total wrinkle score was not significantly different among treatment groups at any time point (P = 0.24)." States that today's low-dose systemic hormone treatments have effects that are "not well established" and that most earlier estrogen and skin studies used doses roughly ten times current ones. The KEEPS figure is therefore cited here via this review; the original paper was behind a retrieval block.
Sitt Lin Bo, Nararatwanchai T, Suornpun N, Poomarapan K, Thaploka S. The efficacy of 2% copper peptide (GHK-Cu) serum for eyebrow hypotrichosis: a randomized, double-blind, vehicle-controlled, split-face comparative study. Procedia of Multidisciplinary Research, vol. 4 no. 5, 2026, published May 22, 2026. Mae Fah Luang University, Thailand. so09.tci-thaijo.org. Tier: abstract and record page read at source; the full PDF did not load, so funding, conflict of interest, eligibility criteria beyond age, sex breakdown and all numerical results remain unseen. 18 healthy participants aged 18 to 40, 12 weeks, 2% GHK-Cu serum against control on opposite eyebrows. Reported: hair count significantly increased from baseline on the treated side (p < 0.05) with no significant change on the control side; hair diameter, global photographic assessment scores and participant satisfaction significantly better on the treated side; no serious adverse effects or allergic reactions. No counts, means, effect sizes or confidence intervals appear in the abstract. The title says "vehicle-controlled" and the abstract says "placebo-controlled"; the record does not resolve the difference.
Mulinari-Brenner F, Bergfeld WF. Hair loss: diagnosis and management. Cleveland Clinic Journal of Medicine. 2003;70(8):705 onwards. mdedge.com. Tier: full text read at source as a PDF. Female androgenetic alopecia shows "decreased density of scalp hair in the central area, with retention of the frontal hairline". In telogen effluvium, "Often, an event triggers the process 3 to 6 months before the shedding begins" and "people with telogen effluvium usually lose 150 to 400 hairs per day", with the condition potentially reversible when its causes are treated. On evaluation: "the clinician should evaluate thyroid function and exclude anemia" and "Hormonal screening can help detect perimenopausal changes and androgen excess." The article is from 2003, and no more recent guideline was retrieved to check it against; the clinical points quoted are long-standing rather than time-sensitive. The exact page range is not shown in the PDF text, so only the first page is cited.
Kossard S, Lee MS, Wilkinson B. Postmenopausal frontal fibrosing alopecia: a frontal variant of lichen planopilaris. J Am Acad Dermatol. 1997 Jan;36(1):59-66. PMID 8996262. Tier: title and partial abstract read via the PubMed search listing; the full abstract was not retrieved. The listing states that hormone replacement therapy "did not appear to influence the course of the alopecia" and that "No evidence of lichen planus was observed at other sites." The case count is not quoted here because the listing did not show it.
Mulinari-Brenner FA, Guilherme MR, Peretti MC, Werner B. Frontal fibrosing alopecia and lichen planus pigmentosus: diagnosis and therapeutic challenge. An Bras Dermatol. 2017;92(5 Suppl 1):79-81. PMID 29267454. Tier: partial abstract read via the PubMed search listing, which describes "marginal progressive hair loss on the scalp, eyebrows and axillae". This is a case report, and it is cited only for the distribution of hair loss, not for frequency.
To D, Beecker J. Frontal fibrosing alopecia: update and review of challenges and successes. J Cutan Med Surg. 2018 Mar/Apr;22(2):182-189. PMID 29056083. Tier: partial abstract read via the PubMed search listing. Describes frontal fibrosing alopecia as "a progressive cicatricial alopecia affecting the frontotemporal hairline" and reports that no randomized controlled trials were found.
Esteban-Lucía L, Molina-Ruiz AM, Requena L. Update on frontal fibrosing alopecia. Actas Dermosifiliogr. 2017 May;108(4):293-304. PMID 28117051. Tier: partial abstract read via the PubMed search listing, which describes the condition as an "increasingly common acquired primary scarring alopecia". The magnitude or period of that increase is not quoted, because the listing did not give one.
Minoxidil 5% for women, over-the-counter Drug Facts label. otclabels.com. Tier: label text read via a reproduction of the Drug Facts panel; the DailyMed search for this product returned no labels and the manufacturer's own label PDF was not retrieved. Active ingredient "Minoxidil USP 5% w/w (without propellant)", purpose "Hair regrowth treatment for women", use "to regrow hair on the top of the scalp", not for use under 18. "Results may occur at 3 months with once-daily use" and "For some women, you may need to use this product once a day for at least 6 months before you see results." The FDA approval date for 5% minoxidil foam for women is not given on this label and no primary document stating it was retrieved, so no approval date appears on this page.

Do Copper Peptides Work for Menopausal Skin and Hair? What Has Been Measured