Divided appeals court rules on BRCA case
1 decision, a federal appeals court today partially reversed a lower court's ruling in a case challenging patents on two human genes, BRCA1 and BRCA2, associated with hereditary breast and ovarian cancer. The court ruled that companies can obtain patents on the genes but cannot patent methods to compare those gene sequences. The lawsuit, Association for Molecular Pathology, et al. v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., charged that the challenged patents are illegal and restrict both scientific research and patients' access to medical care, and that patents on human genes violate the First Amendment and patent law because genes are "products of nature."
"AMP's position agrees with the dissent from today's decision. Genes or a sequence of the genome is a product of nature and should not be patentable," said Timothy J. O'Leary, MD, PhD, AMP President. "While attaching intellectual property rights to true acts of invention such as new therapeutics, diagnostics, or technology platforms is essential to encourage investment and reward innovation, gene patents can serve as a disincentive to innovation in molecular testing because they deny access to a vital baseline of genomic information that cannot be invented around."
One of the three judges on the panel dissented in part with the decision, writing that patents on the genes should be invalid. "…[E]xtracting a gene is akin to snapping a leaf from a tree," Judge William C. Bryson of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit wrote. "Like a gene, a leaf has a natural starting and stopping point. It buds during spring from the same place that it breaks off and falls during autumn. Yet prematurely plucking the leaf would not turn it into a human-made invention."
The lawsuit was filed by the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) and the Public Patent Foundation (PUBPAT) on behalf of breast cancer and women's health groups, individual women, geneticists and scientific associations representing approximately 150,000 researchers, pathologists and laboratory professionals. Because the ACLU's lawsuit challenges the whole notion of gene patenting, its outcome is likely to have far-reaching effects beyond the patents on the BRCA genes.
Dr. O'Leary continued, "Gene patents and exclusive licenses that confine molecular testing to a single provider are detrimental to the public interest by limiting patient access to testing. Monopolies on gene testing make it impossible for patients to access alternate tests or get a second opinion about their results. AMP will continue to advocate until a resolution is found either in the courts or in legislation."
- US Appeals Court opens federal funding for stem cell researchFri, 29 Apr 2011, 16:33:18 EDT
- Statement: The New York Stem Cell Foundation on lifting ban of federal funds for stem cell researchFri, 29 Apr 2011, 13:34:05 EDT
- Looming high court ruling could taint justice, legal expert saysWed, 13 Jan 2010, 18:09:37 EST
- Study shows judges' backgrounds matter in high court selectionMon, 18 May 2009, 17:51:12 EDT
- Sight-saving research halted by stem cell rulingThu, 2 Sep 2010, 13:37:24 EDT
- Appeals Court Upholds Companies' Right to Patent Genes, But the Future of Gene Research Remains Unclearfrom PopSciMon, 1 Aug 2011, 15:00:22 EDT
- Myriad can patent breast cancer genes: US courtfrom PhysorgSat, 30 Jul 2011, 4:00:27 EDT
- Ruling Upholds Gene Patent in Cancer Testfrom NY Times ScienceSat, 30 Jul 2011, 0:20:09 EDT
- U.S. Appeals Court Backs Gene Patents in Myriad Casefrom Science NOWFri, 29 Jul 2011, 18:10:12 EDT
- Gene Patent in Cancer Test Upheld by Appeals Panelfrom NY Times HealthFri, 29 Jul 2011, 16:10:21 EDT
- Top court rules feds not liable in smoking lawsuitsfrom CBC: HealthFri, 29 Jul 2011, 10:00:23 EDT