Gene patent practice across plant and human genomes

The uses of genetic sequences to inform, enable or create products or services for human biomedicine are substantially different from their uses in crop-based agriculture. Here, we explore what similarities and differences may emerge in patent use and strategies, and map patent-disclosed sequences onto three important plant genomes: maize (corn), rice and soybean. We focus on those referenced in the granted patent claims to compare their uses to the approach used in human gene patenting.

Genentech and the stolen gene: Patent law and pioneer inventions

This paper evaluates the litigation over the biotechnology patent dispute between the University of California and Genentech. First it outlines the scientific work behind the cloning of the human growth hormone, and looks at the patent office, and its treatment of biotechnological inventions. Second, it considers the court room dispute, and the legal case of the University of California and the biotechnology company in this dispute. Finally, it considers the implications of this dispute for policy reform in respect of patent law and biotechnology.

Public disclosure of biological sequences in global patent practice

Biological sequences are an important part of global patenting, with unique challenges for their effective and equitable use in practice and in policy. Because their function can only be determined with computer-aided technology, the form in which sequences are disclosed matters greatly. Similarly, the scope of patent rights sought and granted requires computer readable data and tools for comparison. Critically, the primary data provided to the national patent offices and thence to the public, must be comprehensive, standardized, timely and meaningful. It is not yet. The proposed global Patent Sequence (PatSeq) Data platform can enable national and regional jurisdictions meet the desired standards.

The pragmatic approach : the myriad gene patents before the Australian courts

The Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia in D'Arcy v Myriad Genetics [2014] FCAFC 115 recently upheld the validity of Myriad Genetics' Australian BRCA1 gene patent over isolated DNA sequences.

The ownership question of plant gene and genome intellectual properties

The restructuring of the crop agriculture industry over the past two decades has enabled patent holders to exclude, prevent and deter others from using certain research tools and delay or block further follow-on inventions

How Gene Patents May Inhibit Scientific Research

Commentaire / Commentary

Intellectual property and biofuels: The energy crisis, food security, and climate change

In light of larger public policy debates over intellectual property and climate change, this article considers patent practice, law, and policy in respect of biofuels. This debate has significant implications for public policy discussions in respect of energy independence, food security, and climate change. The first section of the paper provides a network analysis of patents in respect of biofuels across the three generations. It provides empirical research in respect of patent subject matter, ownership, and strategy in respect of biofuels. The second section provides a case study of significant patent litigation over biofuels. There is an examination of the biofuels patent litigation between the Danish company Novozymes, and Danisco and DuPont. The third section examines flexibilities in respect of patent law and clean technologies in the context of the case study of biofuels. In particular, it explores the debate over substantive doctrinal matters in respect of biofuels – such as patentable subject matter, technology transfer, patent pools, compulsory licensing, and disclosure requirements. The conclusion explores the relevance of the debate over patent law and biofuels to the larger public policy discussions over energy independence, food security, and climate change.

The Genetics of Ankylosing Spondylitis and Axial Spondyloarthritis

Ankylosing spondylitis (AS) and spondyloarthritis are strongly genetically determined. The long-standing association with HLA-B27 is well described, although the mechanism by which that association induces AS remains uncertain. Recent developments include the description of HLA-B27 tag single nucleotide polymorphisms in European and Asian populations. An increasing number of non-MHC genetic associations have been reported, which provided amongst other things the first evidence of the involvement of the IL-23 pathway in AS. The association with ERAP1 is now known to be restricted to HLA-B27 positive disease. Preliminary studies on the genetics of axial spondyloarthritis demonstrate a lower HLA-B27 carriage rate compared with AS. Studies with larger samples and including non-European ethnic groups are likely to further advance the understanding of the genetics of AS and spondyloarthritis. © 2012.

Analyse anthropologique des politiques de brevetage génétique : le cas du BRCA 1/2 au Québec

Le diagnostic de prédisposition génétique du cancer du sein et de l’ovaire est détenu par la firme de biotechnologie Myriad Genetics depuis 1996, sous la forme d’un brevet, qui lui octroie une licence d’exploitation internationale, infirmant le droit d’analyse moléculaire aux autres laboratoires. Ce monopole, lui permet de statuer sur un prix excessivement plus élevé qu’en milieu public et d’astreindre en justice, les laboratoires contrevenants. Depuis 2001, le Québec est la seule province qui se soumet (en partie) au brevet, en faisant appel à la compagnie pour le séquençage complet. À travers cette recherche, j’analyse les politiques de brevetage génétique, dans sa construction juridique de la propriété intellectuelle et dans les significations culturelles des biotechnologies. Je m’appuie sur un cadre analytique des théories de propriété et sur la recherche en biomédical. Je procède également à l’analyse du discours des médecins et conseillers généticiens au Québec, à travers des entrevues conduites dans des centres hospitaliers de la région de Montréal et de Sherbrooke. Cette étude qualitative identifie comment les conseillers et médecins généticiens conçoivent le rôle des brevets dans les dépistages et diagnostics du cancer et comment les brevets génétiques expriment une culture médicale. Je cherche à déterminer comment sont perçus par des professionnels de santé les brevets génétiques en analysant et en comparant les variations entre limites idéologiques et limites pratiques.

Transparency tools in gene patenting for informing policy and practice

In the recent decision Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics1, the US Supreme Court held that naturally occurring sequences from human genomic DNA are not patentable subject matter. Only certain complementary DNAs (cDNA), modified sequences and methods to use sequences are potentially patentable. It is likely that this distinction will hold for all DNA sequences, whether animal, plant or microbial2. However, it is not clear whether this means that other naturally occurring informational molecules, such as polypeptides (proteins) or polysaccharides, will also be excluded from patents. The decision underscores a pressing need for precise analysis of patents that disclose and reference genetic sequences, especially in the claims. Similarly, data sets, standards compliance and analytical tools must be improved—in particular, data sets and analytical tools must be made openly accessible—in order to provide a basis for effective decision making and policy setting to support biological innovation. Here, we present a web-based platform that allows such data aggregation, analysis and visualization in an open, shareable facility. To demonstrate the potential for the extension of this platform to global patent jurisdictions, we discuss the results of a global survey of patent offices that shows that much progress is still needed in making these data freely available for aggregation in the first place.

Patent-busting: The public patent foundation, gene patents and the Seed Wars

This chapter considers the Public Patent Foundation as a novel institution in the patent framework. It contends that such a model can play a productive role in challenging the validity of high-profile patents; working as an amicus curiae in significant court cases; and also promoting patent law reform. However, there are limits to the ‘patent-busting’ of the Foundation. The not-for-profit legal services organization has only had the time and resources to challenge a number of noteworthy patents. Other jurisdictions – such as Australia – lack such public-spirited "patent-busting" entities. This chapter considers a number of key disputes involving the Public Patent Foundation. Part I examines the role of the Public Patent Foundation in the landmark dispute over Myriad Genetics’ patents in respect of breast cancer and ovarian cancer. Part II considers the role of the Public Patent Foundation in litigation between organic farmers and Monsanto. Part III examines the role of the Public Patent Foundation in larger debates about patent law reform in the United States – particularly looking at the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act 2011 (US). The conclusion contends that the patent-busting model of the Public Patent Foundation should be emulated in respect of other technological fields, and other jurisdictions – such as Australia. The initiative could also be productively applied to other forms of intellectual property – such as trade mark law, designs law, plant breeders’ rights, plant breeders’ rights, and access to genetic resources.

The empire of cancer: Gene patents and cancer voices

In his book, The Emperor of All Maladies, Siddhartha Mukherjee writes a history of cancer — "It is a chronicle of an ancient disease — once a clandestine, 'whispered-about' illness — that has metamorphosed into a lethal shape-shifting entity imbued with such penetrating metaphorical, medical, scientific, and political potency that cancer is often described as the defining plague of our generation." Increasingly, an important theme in the history of cancer is the role of law, particularly in the field of intellectual property law. It is striking that a number of contemporary policy debates over intellectual property and public health have concerned cancer research, diagnosis, and treatment. In the area of access to essential medicines, there has been much debate over Novartis’ patent application in respect of Glivec, a treatment for leukaemia. India’s Supreme Court held that the Swiss company’s patent application violated a safeguard provision in India’s patent law designed to stop evergreening. In the field of tobacco control, the Australian Government introduced plain packaging for tobacco products in order to address the health burdens associated with the tobacco epidemic. This regime was successfully defended in the High Court of Australia. In the area of intellectual property and biotechnology, there have been significant disputes over the Utah biotechnology company Myriad Genetics and its patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 and BRCA2, which are related to breast cancer and ovarian cancer. The Federal Court of Australia handed down a decision on the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patent in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1 in February 2013. The Supreme Court of the United States heard a challenge to the validity of Myriad Genetics’ patents in this area in April 2013, and handed down a judgment in July 2013. Such disputes have involved tensions between intellectual property rights, and public health. This article focuses upon one of these important test cases involving intellectual property, public health, and cancer research. In June 2010, Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy brought an action in the Federal Court of Australia against the validity of a BRCA1 patent — held by Myriad Genetics Inc, the Centre de Recherche du Chul, the Cancer Institute of Japan and Genetic Technologies Limited. Yvonne D’Arcy — a Brisbane woman who has had treatment for breast cancer — maintained: "I believe that what they are doing is morally and ethically corrupt and that big companies should not control any parts of the human body." She observed: "For my daughter, I've had her have [sic] mammograms, etc, because of me but I would still like her to be able to have the test to see if the mutation gene is in there from me." The applicants made the following arguments: "Genes and the information represented by human gene sequences are products of nature universally present in each individual, and the information content of a human gene sequence is fixed. Genetic variations or mutations are products of nature. The isolation of the BRCA1 gene mutation from the human body constitutes no more than a medical or scientific discovery of a naturally occurring phenomenon and does not give rise to a patentable invention." The applicants also argued that "the alleged invention is not a patentable invention in that, so far as claimed in claims 1–3, it is not a manner of manufacture within the meaning of s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies". The applicants suggested that "the alleged invention is a mere discovery". Moreover, the applicants contended that "the alleged invention of each of claims 1-3 is not a patentable invention because they are claims for biological processes for the generation of human beings". The applicants, though, later dropped the argument that the patent claims related to biological processes for the generation of human beings. In February 2013, Nicholas J of the Federal Court of Australia considered the case brought by Cancer Voices Australia and Yvonne D’Arcy against Myriad Genetics. The judge presented the issues in the case, as follows: "The issue that arises in this case is of considerable importance. It relates to the patentability of genes, or gene sequences, and the practice of 'gene patenting'. Briefly stated, the issue to be decided is whether under the Patents Act 1990 (Cth) a valid patent may be granted for a claim that covers naturally occurring nucleic acid — either deoxyribonucleic acid (DNA) or ribonucleic acid (RNA) — that has been 'isolated'". In this context, the word "isolated" implies that naturally occurring nucleic acid found in the cells of the human body, whether it be DNA or RNA, has been removed from the cellular environment in which it naturally exists and separated from other cellular components also found there. The genes found in the human body are made of nucleic acid. The particular gene with which the patent in suit is concerned (BRCA1) is a human breast and ovarian cancer disposing gene. Various mutations that may be present in this gene have been linked to various forms of cancer including breast cancer and ovarian cancer.' The judge held in this particular case that Myriad Genetics’ patent claims were a "manner of manufacture" under s 6 of the Statute of Monopolies and s 18(1)(a) of the Patents Act 1990 (Cth). The matter is currently under appeal in the Full Court of the Federal Court of Australia. This article interprets the dispute over Myriad Genetics in light of the scholarly work of Nobel Laureate Professor Joseph Stiglitz on inequality. Such work has significant explanatory power in the context of intellectual property and biotechnology. First, Stiglitz has contended that "societal inequality was a result not just of the laws of economics, but also of how we shape the economy — through politics, including through almost every aspect of our legal system". Stiglitz is concerned that "our intellectual property regime … contributes needlessly to the gravest form of inequality." He maintains: "The right to life should not be contingent on the ability to pay." Second, Stiglitz worries that "some of the most iniquitous aspects of inequality creation within our economic system are a result of 'rent-seeking': profits, and inequality, generated by manipulating social or political conditions to get a larger share of the economic pie, rather than increasing the size of that pie". He observes that "the most iniquitous aspect of this wealth appropriation arises when the wealth that goes to the top comes at the expense of the bottom." Third, Stiglitz comments: "When the legal regime governing intellectual property rights is designed poorly, it facilitates rent-seeking" and "the result is that there is actually less innovation and more inequality." He is concerned that intellectual property regimes "create monopoly rents that impede access to health both create inequality and hamper growth more generally." Finally, Stiglitz has recommended: "Government-financed research, foundations, and the prize system … are alternatives, with major advantages, and without the inequality-increasing disadvantages of the current intellectual property rights system.’" This article provides a critical analysis of the Australian litigation and debate surrounding Myriad Genetics’ patents in respect of genetic testing for BRCA1. First, it considers the ruling of Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia that Myriad Genetics’ patent was a manner of manufacture as it related to an artificially created state of affairs, and not mere products of nature. Second, it examines the policy debate over gene patents in Australia, and its relevance to the litigation involving Myriad Genetics. Third, it examines comparative law, and contrasts the ruling by Nicholas J in the Federal Court of Australia with developments in the United States, Canada, and the European Union. Fourth, this piece considers the reaction to the decision of Nicholas at first instance in Australia. Fifth, the article assesses the prospects of an appeal to the Full Federal Court of Australia over the Myriad Genetics’ patents. Finally, this article observes that, whatever happens in respect of litigation against Myriad Genetics, there remains controversy over Genetic Technologies Limited. The Melbourne firm has been aggressively licensing and enforcing its related patents on non-coding DNA and genomic mapping.

Gene therapy: Principles, practice, problems and prospects

The remarkable advances made in recombinant DNA technology over the last two decades have paved way for the use of gene transfer to treat human diseases. Several protocols have been developed for the introduction and expression of genes in humans, but the clinical efficacy has not been conclusively demonstrated in any of them. The eventual success of gene therapy for genetic and acquired disorders depends on the development of better gene transfer vectors for sustained, long term expression of foreign genes as well as a better understanding of the pathophysiology of human diseases, it is heartening to note that some of the gene therapy protocols have found other applications such as the genetic immunization or DNA vaccines, which is being heralded as the third vaccine revolution, Gene therapy is yet to become a dream come true, but the light is seen at the end of the tunnel.

Desmosomal gene analysis in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy: spectrum of mutations and clinical impact in practice

Five desmosomal genes have been recently implicated in arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy (ARVD/C) but the clinical impact of genetics remains poorly understood. We wanted to address the potential impact of genotyping.

Heart failure gene therapy: the path to clinical practice

Gene therapy, aimed at the correction of key pathologies being out of reach for conventional drugs, bears the potential to alter the treatment of cardiovascular diseases radically and thereby of heart failure. Heart failure gene therapy refers to a therapeutic system of targeted drug delivery to the heart that uses formulations of DNA and RNA, whose products determine the therapeutic classification through their biological actions. Among resident cardiac cells, cardiomyocytes have been the therapeutic target of numerous attempts to regenerate systolic and diastolic performance, to reverse remodeling and restore electric stability and metabolism. Although the concept to intervene directly within the genetic and molecular foundation of cardiac cells is simple and elegant, the path to clinical reality has been arduous because of the challenge on delivery technologies and vectors, expression regulation, and complex mechanisms of action of therapeutic gene products. Nonetheless, since the first demonstration of in vivo gene transfer into myocardium, there have been a series of advancements that have driven the evolution of heart failure gene therapy from an experimental tool to the threshold of becoming a viable clinical option. The objective of this review is to discuss the current state of the art in the field and point out inevitable innovations on which the future evolution of heart failure gene therapy into an effective and safe clinical treatment relies.