High Court To Hear Key Case On Human Gene Patents.

DIA Daily. This daily enewsletter features summaries of breaking news and information about the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and medical device fields from thousands of global news sources. This easy-to-read enewsletter is delivered to your inbox every business morning.

The New York Times (4/15, A1, Pollack, Subscription Publication) reports that the Supreme Court "is poised to take up the highly charged question of whether human genes can be patented," but "another question could trump it: Has the field of genetics moved so far so fast that whatever the court decides, it has come too late to the issue?" The Times continues, "The hearing comes as rapid scientific advances are producing an explosion of new information about human genes, as well as those of animals, plants and microbes, yielding new approaches to detecting and combating diseases."

        The Christian Science Monitor (4/14, Richey) reports, "The issue arises in a challenge to patents held by Myriad Genetics, a Utah-based diagnostic testing and research firm that developed a way to detect genetic mutations (called BRCA1 and BRCA2) that scientists associate with a higher risk of breast and ovarian cancer. The process is described by the company's lawyers as akin to locating a particular grain of sand in a space the size of the Empire State Building. The tests have helped over a million patients identify risks and develop treatment strategies," but "the American Civil Liberties Union and the Public Patent Foundation charge that Myriad Genetics is actually hindering scientific innovation and undercutting access to medical care for patients who need it."

        Bloomberg News (4/12, Stohr, Decker) reports that "trade groups for the biotechnology, agriculture and drug industries are siding with Myriad," claiming that "gene patents have led to valuable treatments." Meanwhile, "doctor groups such as the American Medical Association are backing the challengers to the patents. They have partial support from the Obama administration, which is urging the court to uphold parts of Myriad's patents and void other aspects."

        The Philadelphia Inquirer (4/15, Sell) reports that "research groups, patient advocates, and the American Medical Association, among others, argue that Myriad's assertion of patent rights to the genes stifles future research and the use of existing, lower-cost diagnostic tools because they involve those genes. Armed with the patent-induced market exclusivity, Myriad charges about $3,000 for a test for which other labs previously charged $200 or less." According to Myriad, "separating pieces of genes requires skilled human intervention and creates a new entity, worthy of a patent, and that 30 years of patent protocol should not be changed."

        The Salt Lake (UT) Tribune (4/15, Harvey) reports that, "without that patent protection, the company says it is unlikely that kind of money would have been poured into research and development. It also points out that research by others has not been stifled, with 10,000 research papers published about BRCA1 and BRCA2." The Tribune notes that "Myriad officials have said that the patents in question are only a small part of its portfolio, and that a negative decision won't have a significant impact on the publicly traded company's finances."

        Also reporting on the story are the Boston Herald (4/15, Kantor), Boston Business Journal (4/15, Subscription Publication) on its "Bioflash" blog, Reuters (4/15, Begley), The Hill (4/15, Baker) on its "Healthwatch," Atlantic Wire (4/15, Estes), Forbes (4/12, Fisher), McClatchy (4/12, Doyle), and Modern Healthcare (4/13, Subscription Publication).

        More Commentary. The Washington Post (4/15) editorializes, "The legal precedent stresses that products of nature aren't patentable, so the justices may well rule against Myriad. But either way, their ruling shouldn't be the end of it. Balancing the benefits of free-flowing research against the value of mobilizing private money to detangle genetic code is a hard policy call that Congress should make."

        The New York Times (4/15, Subscription Publication) editorializes, "The petitioners in the case - doctors, scientific researchers and women's health organizations - argue that the isolated genes are not materially different from genes before extraction, and that allowing Myriad a patent on them would allow the patenting of nature itself, at untold cost to scientific research, medical treatment and patients. We agree with the petitioners, while recognizing that this case is one of the most important and complex disputes involving the intersection of science, law and commerce in a generation." The Times notes that the Administration is conflicted over the case. "The patent office sees the patents as valid and consistent with its duty to protect and promote invention; Solicitor General Donald Verrilli Jr. and the Justice Department oppose them on grounds that what nature makes cannot be patented and Myriad's isolation of DNA did not change it enough to alter nature and be eligible for a patent."

        USA Today (4/14) editorializes, "By locking up the BRCA genes and making its $3,340 test the only one doctors can use without the company's permission, Myriad stifles independent scientific inquiry and the sort of competition that might produce better or cheaper tests. Myriad says it spent hundreds of millions of dollars developing its test, and no one could reasonably object if the company patented only its test. But the gene patents go too far."

        In an op-ed for USA Today (4/14) Peter D. Meldrum, president and CEO of Myriad Genetics, Inc., writes, "To create tests for hereditary breast cancer and ovarian cancer, our company and its investors spent more than $500 million over 17 years before we were able to recoup this investment." Meldrum continues, "Our tests have been used by more than 1 million women to determine whether they are at increased risk of developing hereditary breast, colon, uterine and ovarian cancer. We think it is right for a company to be able to own its findings, just as pharmaceutical and other companies do all the time."

        In an opinion piece in the Dallas Morning News (4/12), Jeffrey A. Rosenfeld, assistant professor of medicine at the New Jersey Medical School, writes about how "DNA belongs not to you but rather to many companies and institutions that have patents on the DNA from your cells. Forty-one percent of the genes in your genome are not legally yours, according to a long list of gene patents granted since the 1980s." Referring to the Myriad Genetics case, Rosenfeld concludes: "Fortunately, the Supreme Court has a chance to rectify this genetic injustice."

        Despite the controversy surrounding the case, columnist Bradley J. Fikes writes in the U-T San Diego (4/13, Fikes), "No matter which way the Supreme Court rules on the Myriad Genetics BRCA breast cancer gene test patenting case, the importance of such patents is diminishing over time. Biotechnology is moving beyond patents derived from naturally occurring gene sequences. The most important biotech patents nowadays are becoming synthetic gene and RNA sequences, proteins and other indisputable contrivances of human ingenuity."

Subscribe to the DIA Daily.View archives.
iPhone and iPad Apps available! Download "BulletinHC."DIA Daily is a digest of the most important news selected from thousands of sources by the editors of BulletinHealthcare. The presence of content or advertising does not endorse, nor imply endorsement of, any products or services by the Drug Information Association. Neither BulletinHealthcare nor the Drug Information Association is liable for the use of or reliance on any information contained in this briefing.

If you would like more information about, or have a question pertaining to, DIA Membership and its benefits, please email membership@diahome.org.Click here to check your membership status.

Drug Information Association | 800 Enterprise Road, Suite 200 | Horsham, PA 19044 Copyright © 2012 by BulletinHealthcare| 11190 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 130 | Reston, VA 20191


Sign up today to have the latest news in drug development worldwide delivered to your inbox ~ DIA's Global Smartbrief.

National Health Service to Map DNA of Up to 100,000 Patients

Effort to focus on cancer in hopes of accelerating diagnosis, improving treatment, and sparking innovation.

 

SHERYL P. DENKER

The Burrill Report

“Understanding and harnessing genetic information offers huge potential to target effective treatments and develop new treatments and cures.”

 

The United Kingdom’s National Health Service says it will map the DNA of up to 100,000 patients with cancer and other rare diseases over the next three to five years at a cost of $162 million (£100 million).

“Britain has often led the world in scientific breakthroughs and medical innovations, from the first CT scan and test-tube baby through to decoding DNA,” says Prime Minister David Cameron, “and Britain should become the first country to introduce genetic sequencing to its mainstream health service.”

Supreme Court To Decide Whether Companies Can Patent Human Genes.

The AP (12/1) reported the Supreme Court "will decide whether companies can patent human genes, a decision that could reshape medical research." The court said last Friday it would hear the case of the Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc. The Times said a "decision will likely resolve an ongoing battle between scientists who believe that genes carrying the secrets of life should not be exploited for commercial gain and companies that argue that a patent is a reward for years of expensive research that moves science forward." Myriad Genetics has a test that probes for a gene that indicates a predisposition to breast cancer and is correlated with ovarian cancer. The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) has challenged Myriad Genetics' patents, with plaintiffs that include "geneticists who said they were not able to continue their work because of Myriad's patents, as well as breast cancer and women's health groups, patients and groups of researchers, pathologists and laboratory professionals."

The New York Times (12/1, A17, Liptak, Subscription Publication, 1.68M) reported that Myriad argues "that the 'isolated molecules' at issue 'were created by humans, do not occur in nature and have new and significant utilities not found in nature.'" Myriad also argues its work "is worthy of encouragement and that its fruits are worthy of protection."

The Wall Street Journal (12/1, Kendall, Subscription Publication) reported that a lower court had ruled that isolating the gene makes it no longer a product of nature and is therefore subject to patent. The company urged the court not to take the case.

Bloomberg News (12/1, Stohr, Decker) reported, "Biotechnology companies say they have been getting patents on genes for 30 years -- and can't attract investment dollars unless they can protect their research from competitors." But "the challengers say isolated DNA is identical to the coding that exists naturally in the body."

DIA Daily is a digest of the most important news selected from thousands of sources by the editors of BulletinHealthcare. The presence of content or advertising does not endorse, nor imply endorsement of, any products or services by the Drug Information Association. Neither BulletinHealthcare nor the Drug Information Association is liable for the use of or reliance on any information contained in this briefing.

Drug Information Association | 800 Enterprise Road, Suite 200 | Horsham, PA 19044

Copyright © 2012 by BulletinHealthcare | 11190 Sunrise Valley Drive, Suite 130 | Reston, VA 20191

       

 

Scientists replace defective DNA with equivalent healthy DNA in battle against mitochondrial disease.

Swapping out DNA to Fight Disease

The Burrill Report

“The method has the potential to dramatically alter treatment of now-incurable mitochondrial diseases.”

Scientists at the Oregon Health & Science University have successfully replaced defective DNA in a human egg with the equivalent DNA from a healthy egg, potentially preventing women from passing on several rare mitochondrial disorders to their offspring.

In the latest study, an extension of a 2009 study performed on monkeys that led to healthy live births, many of the eggs containing the transplanted, healthy, mitochondrial DNA were properly fertilized and went on to produce healthy human embryos.

 

http://www.burrillreport.com/article-swapping_out_dna_to_fight_disease.html