Patent pools and diagnostic testing

Pledging Patent Rights for Fighting Against the COVID-19: From the Ethical and Efficiency Perspective

In response to the great crises of the COVID-19 coronavirus, virtually all new technologies protected by patent rights have been used in practice from diagnostics, therapeutic, medical equipment, and vaccine to prevention, tracking, and containment of COVID-19. However, the moral justification of patent rights is questioned when pharmaceutical patents conflict with public health. This paper proposes a revised approach of deciding on how to address the conflicts between business ethics and patent protections and then compares the different mechanisms of clearing patent thickets. Our findings highlight that patent pledges may not only contribute to achieving the maximized substantive justice of the public but also help patent pledgors fulfill procedural justice. The advantages of patent pledges have attracted many patent holders to make public statements during the COVID-19 pandemic. In contrast, the disadvantages of a free license may make patent pledges not sustainable for a long time without the related supporting measures. Our findings will be helpful for policymakers or company managers to make an appropriate decision on rationally utilizing patent portfolios for fighting against public health crises.

Intellectual Property Rights and Access in Crisis

The importance of access to intellectual property rights (IPR) protected subject-matter in two crucial areas - public health, and educational and cultural engagement - has been extensively demonstrated during the COVID-19 pandemic. Although they involve separate legal areas, patent and copyright, the common thread linking the two is intellectual property's difficult relationship with access in the public interest. This paper examines the tensions caused by access barriers, the tools used to reduce them and their effectiveness. It is clear that the access barriers magnified by COVID-19 are not restricted to narrow or specific contexts but are widespread. They are created by, and are a feature of, our existing IPR frameworks. Open movements provide limited remedies because they are not designed to, nor can adequately address the wide range of access barriers necessary to promote the public interest. Existing legislative mechanisms designed to remove access barriers similarly fail to effectively remedy access needs. These existing options are premised on the assumption that there is a singular "public" motivated by homogenous "interests", which fails to reflect the plurality and cross-border reality of the public(s) interest(s) underpinning the welfare goals of IPR. We conclude that a systemic re-evaluation is required and call for positive and equitable legal measures protective of the public(s) interest(s) to be built within IPR frameworks that also address non-IPR barriers. The current pandemic and development of a "new normal" provides a crucial opportunity to comprehensively consider the public(s) interest(s), not just during a global health crisis, but on an ongoing basis.

Millimeter scale separation of DNA with a replaceable polymer matrix

Electrophoresis is a powerful method that has seen a wide range of applications, often in automated genetic diagnostic instruments that require the use of a replaceable sieving matrix. The power and simplicity of electrophoresis as an analysis technique would be ideal for highly integrated and low-cost analysis systems if the method could be implemented in microfluidics on the scale of several mm. We demonstrate the electrophoretic analysis of DNA with separation lengths as small as 2 mm and with a resolution adequate for the analysis of PCR products, i.e. resolutions of 10-20 base pairs. Such small-scale separations enable analysis systems consisting of microfluidics and microelectronics integrated into a single inexpensive package, thereby overcoming a key challenge facing the development of the lab on chip technologies.

Promising Trends in Access to Medicines

It is a vast understatement to say that the problem of access to medicines in developing countries is complex. Access is limited by a range of factors including inability to pay, a lack of infrastructure, and corruption in some countries. Surrounding and exacerbating these structural and technological problems is the layer of legal rights created by patents and their licensing that complicate and render more expensive the preparation and delivery of needed medicines, particularly those that need to be adapted to the social, health and cultural environment of developing countries. This article provides a survey of innovative strategies that aim at maximizing the potential of patents to facilitate the development and delivery of medicines against diseases, the burden of which falls principally on developing country populations. To understand the context in which these strategies are being proposed and implemented, the article reviews the battles over access to medicines beginning in the late 1980s. It then surveys some of the principal suggestions put forward to better direct innovation systems in addressing the critical health needs of the world's majority including advance market commitments, patent buy-outs, prize funds, public-private partnerships and patent pools.

Patent pools and clearinghouses in the life sciences

The biopharmaceutical industry is slowly absorbing the idea of collaborative patent licensing models. Recently, two patent pools for developing countries have been launched: the Pool for Open Innovation against Neglected Tropical Diseases initiated by GlaxoSmithKline (GSK), which is referred to as the BIO Ventures for Global Health (BVGH) pool, and the Medicines Patent Pool (MPP) initiated by UNITAID. Various organizations have recommended using pools or clearinghouses beyond the humanitarian dimension where many patents are owned by many different actors. As a first attempt, MPEG LA, which administers patent pools in various technology fields, is now setting up a clearinghouse for patents related to molecular diagnostics. These examples as well as the results from an empirical study provide useful insights for the design and administration of future pools and clearinghouses in the life sciences.

The impact of human gene patents on genetic testing in the United Kingdom

PURPOSE

This article reports the results of an empirical study examining the impact of human gene patents on the development and delivery of genetic tests in the public sector in the United Kingdom.

METHODS

Semi-structured qualitative interviews.

RESULTS

The study found that, despite the potential for gene patents to have significant negative consequences for genetic testing, in fact, human gene patents have little or no impact on practice for those developing genetic tests in the public sector in the United Kingdom. This is not because patents are managed optimally; rather, gene patents are essentially ignored. This article reports the factors that motivate this behavior.

CONCLUSIONS

At least insofar as there seems to be no apparent problem of lack of patient access, there is no significant public health problem. However, there is divergence between the legal and the practical situation. Complacency about the lack of impact of patents on access to diagnostics is risky, and concerns about patents should be addressed proactively, rather than reactively.

Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for long QT syndrome

Genetic testing for long QT syndrome exemplifies patenting and exclusive licensing with different outcomes at different times. Exclusive licensing from the University of Utah changed the business model from sole provider to two US providers of long QT syndrome testing. Long QT syndrome is associated with mutations in many genes, 12 of which are now tested by two competing firms in the United States, PGxHealth and GeneDx. Until 2009, PGxHealth was the sole provider, based largely on exclusive rights to patents from the University of Utah and elsewhere. University of Utah patents were initially licensed to DNA Sciences, whose patent rights were acquired by Genaissance, and then by Clinical Data, Inc., which owns PGxHealth. In 2002, DNA Sciences, Inc., "cleared the market" by sending cease-and-desist patent enforcement letters to university and reference laboratories offering long QT syndrome genetic testing. There was no test on the market for a 1- to 2-year period. From 2005-2008, most long QT syndrome-related patents were controlled by Clinical Data, Inc., and its subsidiary PGxHealth. Bio-Reference Laboratories, Inc., secured countervailing exclusive patent rights starting in 2006, also from the University of Utah, and broke the PGxHealth monopoly in early 2009, creating a duopoly for genetic testing in the United States and expanding the number of genes for which commercial testing is available from 5 to 12.

The UNITAID Patent Pool Initiative: Bringing Patents Together for the Common Good

Developing and delivering appropriate, affordable, well-adapted medicines for HIV/AIDS remains an urgent challenge: as first-line therapies fail, increasing numbers of people require costly second-line therapy; one-third of ARVs are not available in pediatric formulations; and certain key first- and second-line triple fixed-dose combinations do not exist or sufficient suppliers are lacking. UNITAID aims to help solve these problems through an innovative initiative for the collective management of intellectual property (IP) rights - a patent pool for HIV medicines. The idea behind a patent pool is that patent holders - companies, governments, researchers or universities - voluntarily offer, under certain conditions, the IP related to their inventions to the patent pool. Any company that wants to use the IP to produce or develop medicines can seek a license from the pool against the payment of royalties, and may then produce the medicines for use in developing countries (conditional upon meeting agreed quality standards). The patent pool will be a voluntary mechanism, meaning its success will largely depend on the willingness of pharmaceutical companies to participate and commit their IP to the pool. Generic producers must also be willing to cooperate. The pool has the potential to provide benefits to all.

IPR Issues and High Quality Genetic Testing

– Patents for genes and genetic tests

– Patent thickets and refusal to license

– Facilitating access to patents

– Research exemption, licensing, patent pools, clearing houses

– Compulsory licenses

– BRCA saga

The impact of patents on the development of genome-based clinical diagnostics: an analysis of case studies

PURPOSE

Fragmented ownership of diagnostic gene patents has the potential to create an "anticommons" in the area of genomic diagnostics, making it difficult and expensive to assemble the patent rights necessary to develop a panel of genetic tests. The objectives of this study were to identify US patents that protect existing panels of genetic tests, describe how (or if) test providers acquired rights to these patents, and determine if fragmented patent ownership has inhibited the commercialization of these panels.

METHODS

As case studies, we selected four clinical applications of genetic testing (cystic fibrosis, maturity-onset diabetes of the young, long QT syndrome, and hereditary breast cancer) that use tests protected by > or =3 US patents. We summarized publically available information on relevant patents, test providers, licenses, and litigation.

RESULTS

For each case study, all tests of major genes/mutations were patented, and at least one party held the collective rights to conduct all relevant tests, often as a result of licensing agreements.

CONCLUSIONS

We did not find evidence that fragmentation of patent rights has inhibited commercialization of genetic testing services. However, as knowledge of genetic susceptibility increases, it will be important to consider the potential consequences of fragmented ownership of diagnostic gene patents.

Sharing knowledge: a new frontier for public-private partnerships in medicine

To help overcome the bottlenecks that limit the development of diagnostic and therapeutic products, academic and industrial researchers, patient organizations and charities, and regulatory and funding institutions should redefine the basis for sharing the knowledge collected in large-scale clinical and experimental studies.

Trust, patents and public perceptions: the governance of controversial biotechnology research

The sustainability of many research endeavors, particularly in controversial areas, requires an understanding of public concerns. As such, governance strategies should be developed to sustain public trust.