Skip to main content

Thank you for visiting nature.com. You are using a browser version with limited support for CSS. To obtain the best experience, we recommend you use a more up to date browser (or turn off compatibility mode in Internet Explorer). In the meantime, to ensure continued support, we are displaying the site without styles and JavaScript.

  • Patents
  • Published:

Emerging patent issues in genomic diagnostics

Nature Biotechnology volume 24, pages 939–941 (2006)Cite this article

The maturation of new technologies and the bundling of diagnostic tests and drugs poses new challenges for the intellectual property system.

This is a preview of subscription content, access via your institution

Access options

Buy this article

  • Purchase on Springer Link
  • Instant access to full article PDF
Buy now

Prices may be subject to local taxes which are calculated during checkout

References

  1. Cho, M.K. et al. J. Mol. Diagn. 5, 3–8 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Koch, W.H. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 3, 749–761 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. http://www.fda.gov/cdrh/oivd/amplichip.html

  4. Filmore, D. Mod. Drug Discov. 7, 47–48 (2004).

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Vogelstein, B., Kinzler, K., White, R. & Nakamura, Y. US Patent 5330892 (July 19, 1994).

  6. Heller, M. & Eisenberg, R. Science 280, 698–701 (1998).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. National Research Council Committee on Intellectual Property Rights in Genomic and Protein Research and Innovation. Reaping the Benefits of Genomic and Proteomic Research: Intellectual Property Rights, Innovation, and Public Health (National Academies Press, Washington, DC, USA, 2006). http://darwin.nap.edu/books/0309100674/html/R1.html

  8. Roses, A.D. Nat. Rev. Drug Discov. 1, 541–549 (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Bartfai, T. Pharmacogenomics J. 4, 226–232 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Roses, A.D. Nat. Rev. Genet. 5, 645–656 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. http://www.ims-global.com//insight/news_story/0007/news_story_000731c.htm.

  12. Slamon, D.J. et al. Science 235, 177–182 (1987).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Slamon, D.J. & McGuire, W. US Patent 4,968,603 (November 6, 1990).

  14. Jaffee, D.R. & Flom, K.J. US Patent 6,358,682 (March 19, 2002).

  15. Gormab, E.G. IVD Technol. 7, 59–60 (September 2001). http://www.devicelink.com/ivdt/archive/01/09/003.html

    Google Scholar 

  16. Cohen, R.L. Gardiner, M.B., Sliwkowski, M.X. & Stelzer, G.T. US Patent 6,573,043 (June 3, 2003).

  17. Mendelsohn, J. J. Clin. Oncol. 20, 1s–13s (2002).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Sato, J.D. et al. Mol. Biol. Med. 1, 511–529 (1983).

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  19. Mendelsohn, J. Kawamoto, T, Sato, G. & Sato, J. US Patent 4,943,533 (July 24, 1990).

  20. Mitchell, P. Nat. Biotechnol. 22, 363 (2004).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  21. Spaulding, E.O. & Key, M.E. US Patent 6,727,072 (April 27, 2004).

  22. http://www.dako.com/index/press/press-list/press-item.htm?newsid=10527&g=true

  23. Peacock, E. & Whiteley, P. Pharmacogenomics 6, 439–442 (2005).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. http://www.fda.gov/bbs/topics/NEWS/2005/NEW01220.html

  25. Grebow, M. IVD Technol. 11, 14 (2005).

    Google Scholar 

  26. Anonymous. Pharmacogenomics 7, 267–269 (2006).

  27. National Institutes of Health. Fed. Reg. 70, 18413–18415 (2005).

  28. The Nuffield Council on Bioethics. The Ethics of Patenting DNA: A Discussion Paper (Nuffield Council on Bioethics, London, July 2002). http://www.nuffieldbioethics.org/fileLibrary/pdf/theethicsofpatentingdna.pdf

  29. 74 USLW 4248.

  30. 74 USLW 4431.

  31. Allen, R.H., Stabler, S.P. & Lindenbaum, J. US Patent 4,940,658 (July 10, 1990).

  32. Eisenberg, R. Nat. Biotechnol. 24, 317–319 (2006).

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This paper was prepared in part under National Institutes of Health/National Human Genome Research Institute grant no. 1 ROI HG02034 'Effects of Gene Patents on Genetic Testing and Research' to Stanford University. I want to thank all those who have helped me in preparing this paper, but the responsibility for errors is mine. I received suport from Affymetrix (Santa Clara, CA, USA) in preparing an Amicus Brief, filed in their name and mine in the recent Metabolite case, Brief for Amici Curiae Affymetrix, Inc. and Professor John H. Barton in Support of Petitioner in Laboratory Corporation of America v. Metabolite Laboratories, Inc., US Supreme Court No. 04-607, December 23, 2005.

Author information

Author notes

  1. John H. Barton is at the Stanford Law School, Crown Quadrangle, 559 Nathan Abbott Way, Stanford University, Stanford, California 94305-8610 USA, and was a visiting scholar in the Department of Clinical Bioethics at the National Institutes of Health during 2004–2005. jbarton@stanford.edu

    • John H Barton
Authors
  1. John H Barton
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Barton, J. Emerging patent issues in genomic diagnostics. Nat Biotechnol 24, 939–941 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0806-939

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/nbt0806-939

This article is cited by

Search

Advanced search

Quick links

Nature Briefing

Sign up for the Nature Briefing newsletter — what matters in science, free to your inbox daily.

Get the most important science stories of the day, free in your inbox. Sign up for Nature Briefing