ArticleGenetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics2010
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.
Article in Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics, 2010. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
22 citing papers in PubMed.
- Utilization of genetic information for medicines development and equitable benefit sharing.Frontiers in genetics · 2023Article
- Research to reduce inequities in cancer risk services: Insights for remote genetic counseling in a pandemic and beyond.Journal of genetic counseling · 2021Article
- Are the gene-patent storm clouds dissipating? A global snapshot.Nature biotechnology · 2015Article
- Distributing the future: The weak justifications for keeping human genomic databases secret and the challenges and opportunities in reverse engineering them.Applied & translational genomics · 2014Article
- Translating personalized medicine using new genetic technologies in clinical practice: the ethical issues.Personalized medicine · 2014Article
- Gene patents: a broken incentives system.Journal of religion and health · 2013Review
- The European BRCA patent oppositions and appeals: coloring inside the lines.Nature biotechnology · 2013Article
- Gene patents and personalized cancer care: impact of the Myriad case on clinical oncology.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2013Article
- Molecular genetic testing and the future of clinical genomics.Nature reviews. Genetics · 2013Review
- Commercial landscape of noninvasive prenatal testing in the United States.Prenatal diagnosis · 2013Review
- Commercial Opportunities and Ethical Pitfalls in Personalized Medicine: A Myriad of Reasons to Revisit the Myriad Genetics Saga.Current pharmacogenomics and personalized medicine · 2013Article
- Cystic Fibrosis Patents: A Case Study of Successful Licensing.LES nouvelles. Licensing Executives Society (U.S.A.) · 2013Article
- Biological diversity in the patent system.PloS one · 2013Article
- Constructing narratives of heroism and villainy: case study of Myriad's BRACAnalysis(®) compared to Genentech's Herceptin(®).Genome medicine · 2013Article
- Cancer treatment according to BRCA1 and BRCA2 mutations.Nature reviews. Clinical oncology · 2012Review
- Testing women with endometrial cancer to detect Lynch syndrome.Journal of clinical oncology : official journal of the American Society of Clinical Oncology · 2011Article
- Anchoring gene patent eligibility to its constitutional mooring.Nature biotechnology · 2010Article
- Patently unpatentable: implications of the Myriad court decision on genetic diagnostics.Trends in biotechnology · 2010Article
- DNA patents and diagnostics: not a pretty picture.Nature biotechnology · 2010Article
- Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for hearing loss.Genetics in medicine : official journal of the American College of Medical Genetics · 2010Article
Corrections and comments
- Commented on by
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
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.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.