Genomics and US security: the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States to weigh in

The corporate buyout of California-based Complete Genomics (CG), a DNA-sequencing company, remains in limbo as China-owned giant BGI Shenzhen’s offer of $117.6 million is scrutinized for potential national security implications. The merger’s fate may hinge on whether the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, an interagency group charged with reviewing large financial transactions that could result in control of a US business by foreign individuals, decides whether retaining control of genomic technology in the United States is a matter of economic and national security. CG and its largest competitor, San Diego–based Illumina, were recently close to reaching a merger deal when the former’s board suddenly switched allegiance to the Chinese company. The two US companies have been mired in a lengthy court battle over patent rights to proprietary sequencing technology. The case appeared to be going CG’s way after a northern California judge granted its motion for partial summary judgment of invalidity of Illumina’s claim of patent infringement, but in November 2012 the court said it would reconsider part of its ruling. Now CG’s own shareholders are also suing to block the sale. The purchase of CG by BGI Shenzhen would give the Chinese-owned company access to advanced sequencing technology and CG’s databases and analytics, along with their client base, which includes the National Cancer Institute and many US universities and research institutes. —Karyn Hede, News Editor

Coming this summer: closure on whether genes can be patented

The long and tortuous saga regarding the legal status of gene patents in the United States will finally come to an end this summer. The US Supreme Court has granted a writ of certiorari (that is, they have agreed to hear the appeal) in the now famous legal case orchestrated by the American Civil Liberties Union against Myriad Genetics regarding their patents on BRCA1 and BRCA2.

Significantly, the Court will address only the issue of whether human genes are patent-eligible. This allows a prior decision to stand that invalidated Myriad’s broad “methods” claims in which they sought to patent the association between mutations in the BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes and a high risk for breast and ovarian cancer.

How the Supreme Court will rule is anyone’s guess. The fact that it agreed to hear the case simply tells us that at least four justices felt that the Court should weigh in on this issue. I’ll personally go out on a (public!) limb and predict that the Court will rule that genes are ineligible for patenting under US law. I’ll also predict that, if I’m right, the wheels of scientific progress will keep right on turning, and, indeed, our patients and the field as a whole will be the beneficiaries. —James P. Evans, Editor-in-Chief

Genetics in Medicine Mission Statement

Genetics in Medicine is a monthly journal committed to the timely publication of:

  • Original reports which enhance the knowledge and practice of medical genetics

  • Strategies and innovative approaches to the education of medical providers at all levels in the realm of genetics

As the official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics and Genomics (ACMG), the journal will:

  • Provide a forum for discussion, debate and innovation concerning the changing and expanding role of medical genetics within the broader context of medicine

  • Fulfill our responsibility to the College membership through the publication of guidelines, policy statements and other information that enhances the practice and understanding of medical genetics

Finally, as genetics becomes increasingly important in the wider medical arena, we will be an accessible and authoritative resource for the dissemination of medical genetic knowledge to providers outside of the genetics community through appropriate reviews, discussions, recommendations and guidelines.