Literature DB >> 23686656

Commercial landscape of noninvasive prenatal testing in the United States.

Ashwin Agarwal1, Lauren C Sayres, Mildred K Cho, Robert Cook-Deegan, Subhashini Chandrasekharan.   

Abstract

Cell-free fetal DNA-based noninvasive prenatal testing (NIPT) could significantly change the paradigm of prenatal testing and screening. Intellectual property (IP) and commercialization promise to be important components of the emerging debate about clinical implementation of these technologies. We have assembled information about types of testing, prices, turnaround times, and reimbursement of recently launched commercial tests in the United States from the trade press, news articles, and scientific, legal, and business publications. We also describe the patenting and licensing landscape of technologies underlying these tests and ongoing patent litigation in the United States. Finally, we discuss how IP issues may affect clinical translation of NIPT and their potential implications for stakeholders. Fetal medicine professionals (clinicians and researchers), genetic counselors, insurers, regulators, test developers, and patients may be able to use this information to make informed decisions about clinical implementation of current and emerging noninvasive prenatal tests.
© 2013 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2013        PMID: 23686656      PMCID: PMC3898859          DOI: 10.1002/pd.4101

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Prenat Diagn        ISSN: 0197-3851            Impact factor:   3.050


  47 in total

1.  Survey confirms fears about licensing of genetic tests.

Authors:  A Schissel; J F Merz; M K Cho
Journal:  Nature       Date:  1999-11-11       Impact factor: 49.962

2.  Diagnostic testing fails the test.

Authors:  Jon F Merz; Antigone G Kriss; Debra G B Leonard; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Nature       Date:  2002-02-07       Impact factor: 49.962

3.  Presence of fetal DNA in maternal plasma and serum.

Authors:  Y M Lo; N Corbetta; P F Chamberlain; V Rai; I L Sargent; C W Redman; J S Wainscoat
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  1997-08-16       Impact factor: 79.321

4.  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 5.  Social and ethnic inequalities in the offer and uptake of prenatal screening and diagnosis in the UK: a systematic review.

Authors:  R E Rowe; J Garcia; L L Davidson
Journal:  Public Health       Date:  2004-04       Impact factor: 2.427

6.  Beyond race or ethnicity and socioeconomic status: predictors of prenatal testing for Down syndrome.

Authors:  Miriam Kuppermann; Lee A Learman; Elena Gates; Steven E Gregorich; Robert F Nease; James Lewis; A Eugene Washington
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  2006-05       Impact factor: 7.661

Review 7.  Can patents deter innovation? The anticommons in biomedical research.

Authors:  M A Heller; R S Eisenberg
Journal:  Science       Date:  1998-05-01       Impact factor: 47.728

8.  Racial-ethnic differences in prenatal diagnostic test use and outcomes: preferences, socioeconomics, or patient knowledge?

Authors:  M Kuppermann; E Gates; A E Washington
Journal:  Obstet Gynecol       Date:  1996-05       Impact factor: 7.661

9.  Methods to increase the percentage of free fetal DNA recovered from the maternal circulation.

Authors:  Ravinder Dhallan; Wei-Chun Au; Subhendra Mattagajasingh; Sarah Emche; Philip Bayliss; Marian Damewood; Michael Cronin; Victoria Chou; Michelle Mohr
Journal:  JAMA       Date:  2004-03-03       Impact factor: 56.272

10.  Testing for BRCA1 mutations: a cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Christine Sevilla; Jean-Paul Moatti; Claire Julian-Reynier; François Eisinger; Dominique Stoppa-Lyonnet; Brigitte Bressac-de Paillerets; Hagay Sobol
Journal:  Eur J Hum Genet       Date:  2002-10       Impact factor: 4.246

View more
  38 in total

1.  Rates of prenatal screening across health care regions in Ontario, Canada: a retrospective cohort study.

Authors:  Robin Z Hayeems; Michael Campitelli; Xiaomu Ma; Tianhua Huang; Mark Walker; Astrid Guttmann
Journal:  CMAJ Open       Date:  2015-04-02

2.  "This lifetime commitment": Public conceptions of disability and noninvasive prenatal genetic screening.

Authors:  Rosemary J Steinbach; Megan Allyse; Marsha Michie; Emily Y Liu; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  Am J Med Genet A       Date:  2015-11-14       Impact factor: 2.802

3.  PURLs: Aneuploidy screening: Newer noninvasive test gains traction.

Authors:  Sarah Nickolich; Narges Farahi; Kohar Jones; Anne Mounsey
Journal:  J Fam Pract       Date:  2016-01       Impact factor: 0.493

4.  Genomic testing reaches into the womb.

Authors:  Malorye Allison
Journal:  Nat Biotechnol       Date:  2013-07       Impact factor: 54.908

5.  Position Statement from the Italian College of Fetal Maternal Medicine: Non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) by maternal plasma DNA sequencing.

Authors: 
Journal:  J Prenat Med       Date:  2013-04

6.  Genetic Counselors' Perspectives About Cell-Free DNA: Experiences, Challenges, and Expectations for Obstetricians.

Authors:  Patricia K Agatisa; Mary Beth Mercer; Marissa Coleridge; Ruth M Farrell
Journal:  J Genet Couns       Date:  2018-06-27       Impact factor: 2.537

7.  "Don't Want No Risk and Don't Want No Problems": Public Understandings of the Risks and Benefits of Non-Invasive Prenatal Testing in the United States.

Authors:  Megan Allyse; Lauren Carter Sayres; Taylor Goodspeed; Marsha Michie; Mildred K Cho
Journal:  AJOB Empir Bioeth       Date:  2015

Review 8.  Do recent US Supreme Court rulings on patenting of genes and genetic diagnostics affect the practice of genetic screening and diagnosis in prenatal and reproductive care?

Authors:  Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Amy L McGuire; Ignatia B Van den Veyver
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2014-07-31       Impact factor: 3.050

9.  Will the introduction of non-invasive prenatal testing for Down's syndrome undermine informed choice?

Authors:  Caroline Silcock; Lih-Mei Liao; Melissa Hill; Lyn S Chitty
Journal:  Health Expect       Date:  2014-02-20       Impact factor: 3.377

10.  Impact of the increased adoption of prenatal cfDNA screening on non-profit patient advocacy organizations in the United States.

Authors:  Stephanie Meredith; Christopher Kaposy; Victoria J Miller; Megan Allyse; Subhashini Chandrasekharan; Marsha Michie
Journal:  Prenat Diagn       Date:  2016-07-18       Impact factor: 3.050

View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.