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 hearing loss.
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 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Framing Ethical Concerns and Attitudes towards Human Gene Patents in the Chinese Press.Asian bioethics review · 2020Article
- DNA patents and diagnostics: not a pretty picture.Nature biotechnology · 2010Article
- Patents in genomics and human genetics.Annual review of genomics and human genetics · 2010Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Genetic testing for heritable hearing loss involves a mix of patented and unpatented genes, mutations and testing methods. More than half of all hearing loss is linked to inherited mutations, and five genes are most commonly tested for in the United States. There are no patents on three of these genes, but Athena Diagnostics holds exclusive licenses to test for a common mutation in the GJB2 gene associated with about 50% of all cases as well as mutations in the MTRNR1 gene. This fragmented intellectual property landscape made hearing loss a useful case study to assess whether patent rights in genetic testing can proliferate or overlap, and whether it is possible to gather the rights necessary to perform testing. Testing for hearing loss is widely available, primarily from academic medical centers. Based on literature reviews and interviews with researchers, research on the genetics of hearing loss has generally not been impeded by patents. There is no consistent evidence of a premium in testing prices attributable to patent status. Athena Diagnostics has, however, used its intellectual property to discourage other providers from offering some tests. There is no definitive answer about the suitability of current patenting and licensing of commonly tested genes because of continuing legal uncertainty about the extent of enforcement of patent rights. Clinicians have also expressed concerns that multiplex tests will be difficult to develop because of overlapping intellectual property and conflict with Athena's sole provider business model.
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.