Literature DB >> 20393305

Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to cancer: comparing breast and ovarian cancers with colon cancers.

Robert Cook-Deegan1, Christopher DeRienzo, Julia Carbone, Subhashini Chandrasekharan, Christopher Heaney, Christopher Conover.   

Abstract

Genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to breast and ovarian cancer can be compared with similar testing for colorectal cancer as a "natural experiment." Inherited susceptibility accounts for a similar fraction of both cancers and genetic testing results guide decisions about options for prophylactic surgery in both sets of conditions. One major difference is that in the United States, Myriad Genetics is the sole provider of genetic testing, because it has sole control of relevant patents for BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes, whereas genetic testing for familial colorectal cancer is available from multiple laboratories. Colorectal cancer-associated genes are also patented, but they have been nonexclusively licensed. Prices for BRCA1 and 2 testing do not reflect an obvious price premium attributable to exclusive patent rights compared with colorectal cancer testing, and indeed, Myriad's per unit costs are somewhat lower for BRCA1/2 testing than testing for colorectal cancer susceptibility. Myriad has not enforced patents against basic research and negotiated a Memorandum of Understanding with the National Cancer Institute in 1999 for institutional BRCA testing in clinical research. The main impact of patenting and licensing in BRCA compared with colorectal cancer is the business model of genetic testing, with a sole provider for BRCA and multiple laboratories for colorectal cancer genetic testing. Myriad's sole-provider model has not worked in jurisdictions outside the United States, largely because of differences in breadth of patent protection, responses of government health services, and difficulty in patent enforcement.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2010        PMID: 20393305      PMCID: PMC3047448          DOI: 10.1097/GIM.0b013e3181d5a67b

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Genet Med        ISSN: 1098-3600            Impact factor:   8.822


  45 in total

1.  Impact of gene patents on the cost-effective delivery of care: the case of BRCA1 genetic testing.

Authors:  Christine Sevilla; Claire Julian-Reynier; François Eisinger; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Brigitte Bressac-de Paillerets; Hagay Sobol; Jean-Paul Moatti
Journal:  Int J Technol Assess Health Care       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 2.188

Review 2.  Genetic risk assessment and BRCA mutation testing for breast and ovarian cancer susceptibility: recommendation statement.

Authors: 
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2005-09-06       Impact factor: 25.391

3.  NCCN clinical practice guidelines in oncology. Colorectal cancer screening.

Authors:  Randall W Burt; James S Barthel; Kelli Bullard Dunn; Donald S David; Ernesto Drelichman; James M Ford; Francis M Giardiello; Stephen B Gruber; Amy L Halverson; Stanley R Hamilton; Mohammad K Ismail; Kory Jasperson; Audrey J Lazenby; Patrick M Lynch; Edward W Martin; Robert J Mayer; Reid M Ness; Dawn Provenzale; M Sambasiva Rao; Moshe Shike; Gideon Steinbach; Jonathan P Terdiman; David Weinberg
Journal:  J Natl Compr Canc Netw       Date:  2010-01       Impact factor: 11.908

4.  Disease gene patents: overcoming unethical constraints on clinical laboratory medicine.

Authors:  J F Merz
Journal:  Clin Chem       Date:  1999-03       Impact factor: 8.327

5.  Assessing controversial direct-to-consumer advertising for hereditary breast cancer testing: reactions from women and their physicians in a managed care organization.

Authors:  Judy Mouchawar; Suzanne Laurion; Debra P Ritzwoller; Jennifer Ellis; Alanna Kulchak-Rahm; Sharon Hensley-Alford
Journal:  Am J Manag Care       Date:  2005-10       Impact factor: 2.229

6.  Benefits of colonoscopic surveillance and prophylactic colectomy in patients with hereditary nonpolyposis colorectal cancer mutations.

Authors:  S Syngal; J C Weeks; D Schrag; J E Garber; K M Kuntz
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  1998-11-15       Impact factor: 25.391

7.  Cost-effectiveness of preventive strategies for women with a BRCA1 or a BRCA2 mutation.

Authors:  Kristin Anderson; Judith S Jacobson; Daniel F Heitjan; Joshua Graff Zivin; Dawn Hershman; Alfred I Neugut; Victor R Grann
Journal:  Ann Intern Med       Date:  2006-03-21       Impact factor: 25.391

8.  Screening and surveillance for the early detection of colorectal cancer and adenomatous polyps, 2008: a joint guideline from the American Cancer Society, the US Multi-Society Task Force on Colorectal Cancer, and the American College of Radiology.

Authors:  Bernard Levin; David A Lieberman; Beth McFarland; Robert A Smith; Durado Brooks; Kimberly S Andrews; Chiranjeev Dash; Francis M Giardiello; Seth Glick; Theodore R Levin; Perry Pickhardt; Douglas K Rex; Alan Thorson; Sidney J Winawer
Journal:  CA Cancer J Clin       Date:  2008-03-05       Impact factor: 508.702

9.  Myriad Genetics: In the eye of the policy storm.

Authors:  E Richard Gold; Julia Carbone
Journal:  Genet Med       Date:  2010-04       Impact factor: 8.822

10.  The BRCA1 Ashkenazi founder mutations occur on common haplotypes and are not highly correlated with anonymous single nucleotide polymorphisms likely to be used in genome-wide case-control association studies.

Authors:  Lutécia H Mateus Pereira; Marbin A Pineda; William H Rowe; Libia R Fonseca; Mark H Greene; Kenneth Offit; Nathan A Ellis; Jinghui Zhang; Andrew Collins; Jeffery P Struewing
Journal:  BMC Genet       Date:  2007-10-04       Impact factor: 2.797

View more
  22 in total

1.  Anchoring gene patent eligibility to its constitutional mooring.

Authors:  Kenneth G Chahine
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2010-12       Impact factor: 54.908

2.  Are the gene-patent storm clouds dissipating? A global snapshot.

Authors:  Johnathon Liddicoat; Tess Whitton; Dianne Nicol
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 54.908

3.  The European BRCA patent oppositions and appeals: coloring inside the lines.

Authors:  Gert Matthijs; Isabelle Huys; Geertrui Van Overwalle; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2013-08       Impact factor: 54.908

Review 4.  Patents in genomics and human genetics.

Authors:  Robert Cook-Deegan; Christopher Heaney
Journal:  Annu Rev Genomics Hum Genet       Date:  2010       Impact factor: 8.929

Review 5.  Cancer treatment according to BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.

Authors:  Kara N Maxwell; Susan M Domchek
Journal:  Nat Rev Clin Oncol       Date:  2012-07-24       Impact factor: 66.675

6.  Patently unpatentable: implications of the Myriad court decision on genetic diagnostics.

Authors:  Mildred Cho
Journal:  Trends Biotechnol       Date:  2010-11       Impact factor: 19.536

7.  Cystic Fibrosis Patents: A Case Study of Successful Licensing.

Authors:  Mollie A Minear; Cristina Kapustij; Kaeleen Boden; Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Robert Cook-Deegan
Journal:  LES Nouv       Date:  2013-03-01

Review 8.  Commercial landscape of noninvasive prenatal testing in the United States.

Authors:  Ashwin Agarwal; Lauren C Sayres; Mildred K Cho; Robert Cook-Deegan; Subhashini Chandrasekharan
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 3.050

Review 9.  Molecular genetic testing and the future of clinical genomics.

Authors:  Sara Huston Katsanis; Nicholas Katsanis
Journal:  Nat Rev Genet       Date:  2013-06       Impact factor: 53.242

Review 10.  Gene patents: a broken incentives system.

Authors:  Yun-Han Huang
Journal:  J Relig Health       Date:  2013-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.