Literature DB >> 28008369

Effect of the economic crisis on the production of immunology patents managed through the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement from 2004-2011.

Elena Campos1, Adolfo Campos1.   

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: To determine the evolution of patents in immunology, as a result of research and innovation in the years 2004-2011.
DESIGN: The search for patents published internationally in immunology was made by using the SCOPUSTM database. SCOPUS gives information about over 23 million patents. The extracted data from patents were: inventors and applicants; their nationalities; sections, classes and subclasses of the International Patent Classification. PARTICIPANTS: 89 countries.
SETTING: Data have been obtained from the database SCOPUS. It has been used for the international patent classification. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Patents by country, Productive sectors, Productive areas.
RESULTS: A total of 17,281 patents were applied for immunology during 2004-2011 of which 16,811 were from 30 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development countries, and 5326 from 28 countries in the European Union. These patents were granted in 89 countries and 13,699 of them were submitted by researchers from only one country. Private entities applied for 62.45% of all patents, universities 17.48%, hospitals 3.40% and public research organisations and private applicants applied for the rest. The university that made more applications was the University of California with 315 and the company was Genentech Inc. (US) with 302. The reduction in the number of applications of international patents in all disciplines of science also affected the area of immunology.
CONCLUSIONS: Collaboration in immunology between universities, companies and hospitals is hard because their interests are different. It is shown in patent applications that the majority of patents in immunology are applied for by only one entity. Patents in immunology are developed, mainly, in aspects such as medical preparations, peptides, mutation or genetic engineering, therapeutic activity of chemical compounds and analysing materials by determining their chemical or physical properties.

Entities:  

Keywords:  PCT; immunology; innovation; patents; technological balance

Year:  2015        PMID: 28008369      PMCID: PMC5167081          DOI: 10.1177/2054270415593449

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  JRSM Open        ISSN: 2054-2704


Background

Research is reckoned as an important contributor to the technological and economic development of a country, which is why public and private entities invest large sums of money in it.[1] This has recently produced a large amount of literature based on bibliometric analyses of scientific production[2] but very few analyses on intellectual property;[3,4] thus, it is difficult to quantify the value of indicators such as patents. These analyses are useful in the fields of innovation, technology transfer and industrial competitiveness, as well as to promote investment in innovation and to provide a framework for the trading of the assets of industrial property via patents and trademarks.[5] The economic problems in recent years have affected all countries, with short- and medium-term consequences, particularly related to lack of confidence. Confidence in the future depends greatly on the capacity for innovation shown by businesses and the state. Investment in knowledge creation had increased in recent years, reaching about 1.1 billion dollars in 2009.[5] The demand for industrial property fell in 2009, but despite the difficult economic conditions, it recovered in 2010. The recovery in international patent filings observed in 2010 gained strength in 2011.[6] Among the countries with the highest number of patent applications through the Patent Cooperation Treaty in 2011 are Saudi Arabia (81.48%), China (33.42), Ukraine (26.60), Russia (20.80), Japan (20.95), Poland (19.59), Mexico (18.84), Austria (17.79), Brazil (17.21), Belgium (12.78), Turkey (12.70), Denmark (11.83) and India (11.19). However, countries such as Malaysia (−24.28), Hungary (−17.44), Portugal (−17.24), Netherlands (−14.00), Ireland (−4.96), Finland (−2.71), Spain (−2.65), Luxembourg (−1.99), Australia (−1.80), Israel (−1.62) and the United Kingdom (−0.96) had a smaller growth. Patents in this context are the result of a big effort in innovation. Thus, the connection between science and politics is a priority for the European Union, as it was agreed in the Lisbon Strategy for Growth and Jobs.[7] It is therefore important to be aware of the evolution of patents in the specific setting of scientific knowledge, in order to analyse the possible opportunities and forms of future development. The 2008 Compendium of Patent Statistics established a series of very interesting conclusions about patents, particularly in such fields as information and communication technology, nanotechnology, biotechnology, technologies related with the environment, nuclear energy and fuel cells.[8] Despite that the generation and transfer of knowledge between science and industry are very important to achieve a good technological balance, bibliometric studies on patents are scarce in specific areas of knowledge.[9]

Methods

A search about patents applied internationally in the field of immunology was carried by using the SCOPUS™ database. SCOPUS gives information about over 23 million patents. For this study, only patent applications under the Patent Cooperation Treaty were considered. The patents were obtained by using the search term ‘immunology’ in the years 2004 to 2011 during February of the following year. Obtained data from patents were: inventors and applicants, their nationalities, and sections, classes and subclasses of the International Patent Classification (IPC), using eighth version 2008.01 (http://www.wipo.int/classifications/ipc/en).

Results

Evolution by countries

A search in the SCOPUS database for immunology patents produced a total of 17,281 patent applications during 2004–2011 of which 16,811 were from 30 Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) countries and 5326 from 28 countries in the European Union. The analysis of these patents shows that they were granted in 89 countries; 13,699 (79.27%) of them were submitted by researchers from only one country, 2781 by researchers from two countries, 446 by researchers from three countries, 74 by researchers from four countries, 5 by researchers from five countries, 3 by researchers from six countries, and only one by researchers from eight countries. It was in the year 2007 that we found the highest number of patent applications, and from that year it decreased progressively in all countries, except China (Table 1).
Table 1.

Evolution of immunology patents managed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement during 2004–2011.

Country200420052006200720082009201020112004–2011
United States1,0691,3011,6601,7381,5841,33981995410,464
Great Britain186163199259218197132941,448
Germany1561771892101881801111001,311
Switzerland978010913412313993106881
France831041471331341027068841
Canada6679103102106744656632
Israel59771038779896762623
Australia8576898696676240601
Holland5765689082522934477
Japan6868819758443518469
Italy3543746548503435384
Belgium2535546169672931371
Denmark841564953483126341
Sweden2937366162362118300
Austria422527352424149200
Spain2323273125241525193
China1619182716202636178
South Korea131935202825156161
India72329252024913150
Singapore711202619212317144
All the countries
 Patents1,8372,0902,6562,8282,6022,2181,5551,49517,281[a]
 From one country1,4971,6842,1402,2932,0401,7621,1141,16913,699
 From several countries3293845135205184522993053,320
OECD
 Patents1,8052,0302,5942,7512,5162,1741,5091,43216,811
European Union -28
 Patents60664080888080127174554185,326

262 patents do not specify the nationality or the researchers or the applicants.

Evolution of immunology patents managed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement during 2004–2011. 262 patents do not specify the nationality or the researchers or the applicants. Despite the recovery in the number of patent applications produced in 2011 in the field of immunology, there was still a reduction in international patent applications. Likewise, the so-called emerging countries have hardly any patents applied through Patent Cooperation Treaty in recent years. The United States was the main patent applicant with 10,464 (60.55% of the total), 8445 were carried out just by US researchers and 2019 together with researchers from other countries, 60.02% of patents from OECD and 38.85% from the European Union were granted to researchers from one single country (Table 1).

Productive sectors

Private entities produced 10,793 (62.45%) of all patents, followed by universities (3022, 17.48%) and hospitals (588, 3.40%); the other 1960 came from Public Research Organizations (PROs) and, mostly, private applicants. On the few occasions when there has been collaboration between different sectors, in most cases this has been established between private entities and universities; collaborations between universities and hospitals are very few (Table 2).
Table 2.

Evolution of immunology patents managed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement during 2004–2011, by productive sector.

Year20042005200620072008200920102011Total
Private entities1,2471,3071,69518031,5481,30496392610,793
Universities2153124555084894243402793,022
Hospitals539791108113664218588
Others2312462903042602851771671,960
Private entities + universities2334434050423140303
Private entities + hospitals61615612135477
Private entities + others191415152739159153
Universities + hospitals6986117121069
Universities + others1620272035261830192
Hospitals + others9895448249
Private entities + universities + hospitals200030128
Private entities + universities + others4032423523
Private entities + hospitals + others100003015
Universities + hospitals + others3522230219
Private entities + universities + hospitals + others010000001
Evolution of immunology patents managed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement during 2004–2011, by productive sector.

Productive areas

Patents in immunology are assigned mainly (9212) in subclass A61K (preparations or medical dressing, dental), 5455 to C07K (peptides), 3987 to C12N (microorganisms or enzymes, compositions thereof, spread, preservation or maintenance of microorganisms, mutation or genetic engineering), 3865 to A61P (therapeutic activity of chemical compounds or medicinal preparations), and 3097 to G01N (investigating or analysing materials by determining their chemical or physical properties) (Table 3).
Table 3.

Distribution by international patent classification section, class and subclasses, of the Immunology patents managed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement during 2004–2011.

SectionClassSubclassYear
% 2011/ maximum
20042005200620072008200920102011 Total
Aall1,5151,5962,3172,7192,3002,019100290214,37033.17
A01all80737495968681561,49358.33
A01K453533453218191023722.22
A01N2828152939453334251 75.55
A01H71024202211271113240.74
A23all3843253225256720116.27
A23L2222121712154510922.72
A61all1,3951,4401,6882,5901,9081,85994587512,70033.78
A61K9851,1401,1231,7271,2691,2338958409,21248.63
A61P3322305207825925814084203,865 53.70
A61B4135111599241269.75
A61L61512141719910102 58.82
A61F7671776635917.64
Ball56563427432447829514.28
B01all241412131015659920.83
Call2,1862,1761,7752,4761,8851,72296886314,05134.85
C07all1,1431,1418401,2989028436475207,33440.06
C07K8798776148036536555074675,455 53.12
C07D141141123386150127119951,28224.61
C07H919377776353324052643.01
C07C20171723250121112544.00
C08all21418191914413103 68.42
C12all1,0271,0048961,1199398354824626,76441.28
C12N6326134856445164723362893,98744.87
C12Q2973053163493312781631622,20146.41
C12P8068829671615561574 63.54
C12M1396251112999436.00
C40all105153019221625142 83.33
D + E + F  + Hall88711131630660.00
Gall4134874405274924142782973,348 56.35
G01all3894563984794433872772883,117 60.12
G01N3884523974744423842742863,097 60.33
G06all23293744472641322327.65
G06F22263036321431117430.55
None0365305916857254291725.00
Distribution by international patent classification section, class and subclasses, of the Immunology patents managed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty agreement during 2004–2011.

Top applicants

The University of California (US) with 315 patent applications was the largest filer among educational institutions, followed by Johns Hopkins University (US), the University of Texas (US), the University of Harvard (US) and the University of Michigan (US). Likewise, the top five applicant companies with highest number of patent applications in the Patent Cooperation Treaty during this period were Genentech Inc. (US), Novartis AG (CH), Abbott Lab (US), Wyeth Corp (US) and Glaxo Group Ltd (GB) (Table 4).
Table 4.

Entities with the highest production of patents during 2004–2011.

EntitiesPatents
Univ California [US]315
Genentech Inc [US]302
Novartis AG [CH]268
Abbott Lab [US]155
Wyeth Corp [US]152
Glaxo Group Ltd [GB]148
US Government [US]146
Univ Johns Hopkins [US]137
Hoffmann la Roche (CH)130
Amgen Inc [US]122
Inst Nat Sante Rech Med [FR]122
Univ Texas [US]118
Centocor Inc [US]112
Schering Corp [US]108
Yeda Res & Dev [IL]100
Pfizer Prod Inc [US]97
Harvard College [US]91
GlaxoSmithKline Biolog SA (BE)83
Scripps Research Inst (US)78
Dana Farber Cancer Inst Inc (US)77
Gen Hospital Corp [US]77
Merck & Co Inc (US)76
Univ Michigan (US)74
Biogen Idec Inc [US]73
Astrazeneca AB [SE]72
SmithKline Beecham Corp [US]71
Pasteur Institut (FR)69
Centre Nat Rech Scient (FR)68
Zymogenetics Inc [US]65
Univ Leland Stanford Junior [US]63
Univ Florida (US)53
Entities with the highest production of patents during 2004–2011.

Patents and population and gross national income

The applications published by each country showed no correlation with population size or with its gross national income per capita (Table 5).
Table 5.

Countries by published patents, population and gross national income per capital.

CountryPatents 2004–2011Population by millions inhabitantsGross national income per capita/billions of dollars
US10,46430746,360
GB1,4486241,370
DE1,3118242,450
CH881865,430
FR8416342,620
CA6323441,980
IL623725,790
AU6012243,770
NL4771748,460
JP46912838,080
IT3846035,110
BE3711145,270
DK341659,060
SE300948,840
AT200846,450
ES1934632,120
CN1781,3313,650
KR1614919,830
IN1501,1551,220
SG144537,220
Countries by published patents, population and gross national income per capital.

Discussion

This is one of the first systematic reviews of patents to analyse countries, authorship details, centres and research fields. Studies on patents are useful to ensure effective research funding from both public and private organisations. These studies stimulate research and technological innovation, and are quite important for improving indicators that measure the benefit of the innovation.[10] The Knowledge Society is changing, not just academically (Bologna Plan, or the lesser known Alexandria Plan) but also in areas like science, technology and economy; progress and wealth sources that affect the quality of life. Technological innovations in immunology are contributing to the design of new drugs and new methods of clinical diagnosis. Future models, dealing with basic homeostasis, immunity against pathogens, antigen presentation mechanisms, cytokines, mechanisms of autoimmunity, gene recombination, cell cycle regulation, signal transduction and cell sociology will all generate patentable advances such as vaccines and/or treatments. From the research and development (R&D) point of view, immunology covers three main areas. First, immunodiagnostics, which uses the processing and analysis of images to detect abnormalities in the immune system during the early stages of a disorder, thus reducing the healthcare costs for the health care-provider. Second, immunotechnology, which takes elements from the immune system to be used as drugs, thus acting more efficiently and with fewer adverse effects on the relevant cells and areas of the organism. And third, immunotools, which uses elements of the immune system for the detection, localisation, management and repair of damaged organs and tissues. Development and progress in science, technology and economy in immunology, as in many other fields, are determined by different factors, such as a more business-oriented culture; in order to improve this, some universities have already incorporated into their study plans subjects related to how to start up a business and support programme to strengthen the connection between R&D and businesses. It is also important to note the fact that due to the current economic situation business people are changing their minds in this respect, and they are seen to be more willing to welcome this kind of collaboration.[11] History has shown that countries and companies that invested in new products and innovative activities during periods of economic recession have found themselves in an optimal position to take advantage from the situation once the economy has recovered.[12] Patent applications, as a whole, decreased in 2009 but began increasing in 2010 and 2011. However, the trend in immunology was decreasing until 2011, which was not expected by the World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) for 2020.[13] It is important to notice the scarce collaboration between different economic sectors in immunology. As the president of the European Patent Office said, the most successful countries in innovation are the ones that promote a good cooperation between universities, research centres and industries.[14] In immunology, this collaboration between public and private research sectors should therefore be supported and encouraged, although this is not a definitive solution.[15] At the same time, the inter-institutional collaboration is maintained in a conceptually elusive and difficult area to achieve, for various reasons such as: cultural clashes, overly bureaucratic agencies, rewards poorly designed or ineffective management of the offices of university technology transfer.[16] The organisations that fund research want results to be easily measured (articles or impact factors) and the researchers themselves try to fill their curriculum with the sort of contributions that work faster. The goals of research are sometimes confused with the means of making the results known. To establish a good connection between sectors, it is necessary to establish clear criteria for the selection of partners and addressing conflicts of interest; likewise, cooperation can sometimes interfere with academic freedom and altruistic research. It is shown that immunology patents are assigned to fewer sections, classes and subclasses of the International Patent Classification during the last two years. The cultural tradition in the European Union and the cultural and economic ties with the United States make this country the main technological partner for researchers. Almost half of all patents are presented together with a United States partner. China is starting its internationalisation. Less than 20% of patents come from universities, although some of them are part of the group of entities that have the most patents in immunology. In 2008–2009, expenditure on R&D&i is maintained despite the financial crisis. In the European Union, the fall of Gross Domestic Product was higher than the amounts allocated to R&D, producing a net effect of increasing the percentage of investment in R&D&i. It is also important to consider the impact of intellectual property rights protection on the growth rate of a country. Regression techniques have shown that in countries with a Gross Domestic Product below 3400 US dollars (in 1980 dollars) there is no significant relation between intellectual property rights and growth, but above this threshold the relation is significantly positive.[17] Falvey et al.[17] found that those countries that gave greater intellectual property rights protection were more attractive destinations for foreign patents. Countries need companies to investigate and put products on the market; otherwise, the countries will become technological colonies of other countries.
  3 in total

1.  Is academic medicine for sale?

Authors:  L F Ross
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-08-17       Impact factor: 91.245

Review 2.  Drug development for neglected diseases: a deficient market and a public-health policy failure.

Authors:  Patrice Trouiller; Piero Olliaro; Els Torreele; James Orbinski; Richard Laing; Nathan Ford
Journal:  Lancet       Date:  2002-06-22       Impact factor: 79.321

Review 3.  How has healthcare research performance been assessed?: a systematic review.

Authors:  Vanash M Patel; Hutan Ashrafian; Kamran Ahmed; Sonal Arora; Sejal Jiwan; Jeremy K Nicholson; Ara Darzi; Thanos Athanasiou
Journal:  J R Soc Med       Date:  2011-06       Impact factor: 5.344

  3 in total
  1 in total

1.  Emerging CAR T cell therapies: clinical landscape and patent technological routes.

Authors:  Virgínia Picanco-Castro; Cristiano Gonçalves Pereira; Kamilla Swiech; Kelen Cristina Ribeiro Malmegrim; Dimas Tadeu Covas; Geciane Silveira Porto
Journal:  Hum Vaccin Immunother       Date:  2019-12-06       Impact factor: 3.452

  1 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.