Posts Tagged: "lung cancer"

The Unpredictable Prospects of Patenting Cancer Innovation

Art Unit 1618 and 1621 are both identified as relating to “organic compounds – part of the class 532-570 series.” However, the patenting probability for cancer related applications is markedly different between these two art units. 70.5% of the cancer patent applications assigned to Art Unit 1621 were patented, while only 42.3% assigned to Art Unit 1618 were patented. Indeed, nearly one-quarter of all cancer applications are assigned to art units with low allowance rates, while 16% were assigned to art units with much higher allowance rates… The cancer-application allowance rates range from 20.5% to 100.0% in various art units (with the general allowance rate of these art units ranging from 25.7% to 97.8%). Thus, the probability of securing patent protection on a cancer-related innovation exhibits marked variability and appears to be highly dependent on art-unit assignment.

Eli Lilly patent covering Alimta lung cancer treatment upheld in final written decision from PTAB

On Thursday, October 5th, a final written decision issued by the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (PTAB) upheld a series of 22 claims from a patent owned by Indianapolis, IN-based drugmaker Eli Lilly & Company (NYSE:LLY). This decision ends an inter partes review (IPR), which was initially petitioned by Chicago, IL-based generic pharmaceutical firm Neptune Generics to challenge a patent covering Alimta, a drug approved by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) as a treatment for patients with advanced nonsquamous non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC). Although sales of Alimta have dropped in recent months, the cancer treatment remains an important part of Eli Lilly’s portfolio.

Blue Ribbon Panel of Advisors Announced for Biden Cancer Moonshot Initiative

Earlier this week the National Cancer Institute (NCI), which is part of the National Institutes of Health, announced a Blue Ribbon Panel of scientific experts, cancer leaders, and patient advocates that will work to inform the scientific direction and goals for Vice President Joe Biden’s National Cancer Moonshot Initiative. “Thanks to advances in science, we are now in a historically unique position to make profound improvements in the way we treat, detect, and prevent cancer,” said NIH Director Francis S. Collins, M.D., Ph.D. He is correct, and here is why.

Bolder initiatives needed to take next steps in fight against cancer

February 4 is World Cancer Day… There has been steady progress made in the history of treating cancers of many types since the administration of former U.S President Richard Nixon, according to Dr. Boris Pasche, the Director of the Wake Forest Baptist Medical Center’s Comprehensive Cancer Center. “In my opinion, government should embark on bold new initiatives in cancer treatment,” Pasche said. He did note that, while what President Obama says as a statesman doesn’t change the humbling reality that many cancers have so far stumped medical scientists. Nevertheless, increased investments into cancer research have dramatically impacted survival rates. Over the past decade, most cancers show a better outcome than they did ten years ago. “Bolder initiatives with disruptive approaches to cancer are in order if we want to make leaps forward more quickly,” Pasche said.

Federal funding for a cancer moonshot is not a terrible idea

To hear Ars Technica say it is ”a terrible idea” to devote increased funding in order to eradicate cancer is astonishing on many levels. As part of the reason why he believes increased funding for cancer research is a terrible idea he explains that great strides have been made with respect to treatments and cures, which is true. Of course, it is also true that people are dying and they are dying horrible deaths. With the victories and advances that have been made over the last generation it is no longer fanciful to dream of a day when cancer can become eradicated. So why is it a terrible idea to devote more resources on a so-called cancer moonshot to attempt to once and for all put an end to this scourge? For anyone to call President Obama’s cancer moonshot a terrible idea is nothing short of cruel, and is frankly incredibly stupid.

Genetic and Stem Cell Therapies to Treat Cancers

There are certainly some signs for hope. One of them came recently from Princeton University, where graduate students worked on a project which identified a treatment for blocking an enzyme which is important for metastasis, or the spread of cancer through a patient’s body. Many methods of treating cancers can be incredibly damaging to a patient’s body. Today there are many cancer treatments that are developed with an eye towards minimizing the difficult side effects caused by a regimen of chemotherapy or radiation.

Pfizer Focuses Recent Patent Activity on Antibacterial Agents

Patent applications recently published by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office show that Pfizer’s recent development goals have focused on a broad spectrum of diseases and disorders… Treatments for a number of bacterial infections which can develop in hospital settings was another field of innovation reflected both in Pfizer’s patent applications as well as the patents recently assigned to the company. A couple of recently issued patents protect treatments against gram-negative bacteria by inhibiting a catalyst enzyme necessary for bacterial reproduction.

Biotech and Pharma Update: January 2014

Kava Plant May Prevent Cigarette Smoke-induced Lung Cancer *** Conditional Approval for Treatment of T-cell Lymphoma in Dogs *** All-Oral, Interferon-Free Therapy for the Treatment of Hepatitis C Genotype 1 *** Favorable Markman Ruling for Dopomed in GRALISE® Patent Litigation *** More FDA Woes for Ranbaxy *** Inovio Develops DNA-based Immune Booster to Enhance T-cell Responses *** Fish & Richardson Wins Hatch-Waxman Litigation for Allergan *** FDA approves Mekinist with Tafinlar for Advanced Melanoma

Patent Granted on Long-Acting Drug for Multiple Sclerosis

The conjugates covered by this patent could enable less frequent and better tolerated dosing of one of the most widely used treatments worldwide for relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis, interferon-beta-1b. The invention described in the European Patent relates to methods for the preparation of conjugates of poly(ethylene glycol), and derivatives thereof, with interferon-beta-1b. Compared to the corresponding unconjugated bioactive components, the conjugates of the invention have increased stability (i.e., longer shelf life and longer half-lives in vivo). In addition, compared to conjugates of the same bioactive component prepared with polymer chains that are attached randomly to solvent-accessible sites along the polypeptide chains, the conjugates of the invention have increased receptor-binding activity and increased potency.

US Oncologists Report Crucial Cancer Drug Shortages

The mantra of the anti-patent community is nearly in unison on the issue of patented drugs. Of course, everyone wants drugs to be developed, but no one wants to pay the exorbitant prices charged for blockbuster, patented drugs. You can add me to that list of individuals who doesn’t like the prices, but at least there is a benefit. Without appropriate financial incentives in place drugs would not be patented, but then again they wouldn’t be developed either. But what is the justification for scarcity and exorbitant prices of old drugs that are off patent?