ReviewCold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine2014
Patentability of genes: a European Union perspective.
Review in Cold Spring Harbor perspectives in medicine, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Applications of liposomes and lipid nanoparticles in cancer therapy: current advances and prospects.Experimental hematology & oncology · 2025Review
- Are ecological processes that select beneficial traits in agricultural microbes nature's intellectual property rights?Nature biotechnology · 2023Article
- How does emerging patent case law in the US and Europe affect precision medicine?Nature biotechnology · 2019Article
- Corporate control and global governance of marine genetic resources.Science advances · 2018Article
- Cancer biomarker discovery and validation.Translational cancer research · 2015Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Unlike the position in the United States following the recent Supreme Court decision in Myriad, in the European Union naturally occurring genetic sequences, whether of human or other origin, remain patent-eligible. Here the basis for such eligibility in legislation and in case law is explained. The utility of a sequence must be disclosed as a condition of eligibility, and requirements outlined in European Patent Office (EPO) and U.K. case law are discussed. A claimed sequence must also satisfy requirements of novelty and inventive step, the latter being considered primarily using the tests of "obvious to try" and reasonable expectation of success. From both positive and negative examples the significance of an identifiable difficulty supported by documentary and/or experimental evidence is apparent. Issues of priority and subject matter added by amendment during prosecution of an application can create unexpected problems given the narrow interpretation within the EPO of the identity of a disclosed sequence, and these problems are explored using as an example an opposition to a European patent covering BRCA1 gene sequences. Practical steps for the drafting of patent specifications to be filed in Europe are outlined.
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.