This paper is part of the free Open Access archive of the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

Singapore's biomedical science sector development strategy: Is it sustainable?

Go to paper

ABSTRACT: This paper outlines the strategic efforts undertaken by Singapore to establish its national capability in the biomedical science sector, reviews the commercial base as a result of these efforts and compares Singapore's approach with the UK and US development models, discusses the challenges that Singapore faces and raises some questions on the long-term sustainability of the sector...

The Journal of Commercial Biotechnology is a unique forum for all those involved in biotechnology commercialization to present, share, and explore new ideas, latest thinking and best practices, making it an indispensable guide for those developing projects and careers within this fast moving field.

Each issue publishes peer-reviewed, authoritative, cutting-edge articles written by the leading practitioners and researchers in the field, addressing topics such as:

• Management
• Policy
• Finance
• Law
• Regulation
• Bioethics

For more information, see the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology website

After months of development, BiologicPatentWatch.com is live.

Building on the framework of DrugPatentWatch, BiologicPatentWatch provides comprehensive details on FDA approved biologic drugs, developers and patents. The integrated databases allow both freeform searching and dynamic browsing, making it easy to find information on drug patents both in the US and internationally, Orphan Drug Status, trends in patent expirations and more …

 BiologicPatentWatch concentrates deep knowledge on biologic drugs from more than 60 biotechnology companies, including more than 2,800 active and expired US patents and 41,000 international patents spanning 91 countries and regional patent offices.

BiologicPatentWatch complements DrugPatentWatch’s focus on small molecule drugs, and provides comprehensive information on:

• monoclonal antibodies
• cytokines, growth factors, enzymes, immunomodulators; and thrombolytics
• proteins intended for therapeutic use that are extracted from animals or microorganisms, including recombinant versions of these products (except clotting factors)
• other non-vaccine therapeutic immunotherapies

Check out the free biotechnology industry infographics and database preview, or sign up for a free trial today!

This is a guest post from Susan K Finston, President of Finston Consulting. Do you have a response to Susan’s post? Respond in the comments section below.

In an unanimous decision in Bowman v. Monsanto, argued February 19, 2013 and decided May 13, 2013, the U.S. Supreme Court explicitly confirms that the exhaustion doctrine does not extend to progeny of so-called self-replicating technologies.

We provided a summary of the oral argument here in the blog, and a longer  look at the case in a recent issue of the Journal for Commercial Biotechnology, here, anticipating that the primary point of interest in the case for the U.S. Supreme Court was the opportunity to address the intersection of the exhaustion doctrine and self-replicating inventions.

The idea that the case was all about a new asserted exception from patent rights for digital and GM technologies was signaled by statements of the Justices at Oral Argument and so was not particularly insightful.  Now this has been borne out by the Opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, delivered this morning by Justin Kagan:

[T]he exhaustion doctrine does not enable Bowman to make additional patented soybeans without Monsanto’s permission (either express or implied). And that is precisely what Bowman did. He took the soybeans he purchased home; planted them in his fields at the time he thought best; applied glyphosate to kill weeds (as well as any soy plants lacking the Roundup Ready trait); and finally harvested more (many more) beans than he started with. That is how “to ‘make’ a new product,” to use Bowman’s words, when the original product is a seed. Brief for Petitioner 37; see Webster’s Third New International Dictionary 1363 (1961) (“make” means “cause to exist, occur, or appear,” or more specifically, “plant and raise (a crop)”). Because Bowman thus reproduced Monsanto’s pa tented invention, the exhaustion doctrine does not protect him. Were the matter otherwise, Monsanto’s patent would provide scant benefit.

In sum, Petitioner Vernon Hugh Bowman does not pass, go, collect $200 or otherwise avoid licensing fees by purchasing patented GM seeds outside of his ongoing Technology Agreement with the inventor and Respondent, Monsanto Company.

Just like death and taxes, Bowman has to pay for the advanced technologies and other agricultural inputs that he wants to use, including GM seeds that make his job easier, improve yields and contribute to the success of his farm.  And as noted previously, both Monsanto and U.S. Government attorneys have stated that this case does not affect farmers who do not intentionally plant GM seeds without payment of royalties.

Susan K. Finston is President of Finston Consulting LLC, and, together with biotechnology pioneer Ananda Chakrabarty, is co-founder of Amrita Therapeutics Ltd., an emerging biopharmaceutical company based in India with cancer peptide drugs entering in vivoresearch. She is currently preparing to launch her first Crowd Funding campaign for Amrita Therapeutics first-ever therapeutic oncology medical device. For more information see AmritaTherapeutics.com or FinstonConsulting.com.

Drug Patent Expirations for May 2013

This paper is part of the free Open Access archive of the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology

Marketspace: Leading biotechnology players, 2002–08: Key products, indications and technologies

Go to paper

ABSTRACT: For the full year 2002, the top ten biotechnology houses generated combined revenues (= royalties/licensing income + ethical or product sales; product sales includes both diagnostic and prescription drugs) of US$15.9bn, a 27 per cent increase over 2001. Using Datamonitor's proprietary forecasting methodology, the ethical sales of the ten leading biotechnology companies (Amgen, Genentech, Serono, Genzyme, Biogen, Chiron, MedImmune, Gilead, IDEC and Celltech) are forecast to grow from US$17...

The Journal of Commercial Biotechnology is a unique forum for all those involved in biotechnology commercialization to present, share, and explore new ideas, latest thinking and best practices, making it an indispensable guide for those developing projects and careers within this fast moving field.

Each issue publishes peer-reviewed, authoritative, cutting-edge articles written by the leading practitioners and researchers in the field, addressing topics such as:

• Management
• Policy
• Finance
• Law
• Regulation
• Bioethics

For more information, see the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology website

As I continue to investigate global biotechnology for Scientific American and international patenting trends for DrugPatentWatch.com, I came across a curious finding.

I was looking at the global spread of US drug patents — to obtain global patent protection for drugs companies must file for patents in each of the jurisdictions that they seek protection, within 12 months of the initial filing. Patents last for roughly 20 years, which means that current patent activity reflects a 20-year forward-looking sentiment on the attractiveness of a market.

When comparing India and China one sees an interesting trend. Before the 1980s there was little interest in obtaining patent protection in either country. In fact, it wasn’t possible in India because the country had not yet adopted the TRIPS accords which permit product patents. Over the course of the 1980s and 1990s interest in China increased, stabilizing at roughly 70% representation of US drug patents in that market.

In 2005 India adopted the TRIPS accords and (partially*) permitted product patents, so it would be very interesting to observe how global patenting trends were affected by the new ability to obtain pharmaceutical product patents there. Unfortunately, in 2005 Indian sources stopped sharing patent data with the European Patent Office, which serves as a global clearinghouse of patent globally-linked patents. This lack of transparency makes it impossible to determine global interest in the Indian market, and  robs India the opportunity to tell the story of the impact of taking steps towards harmonizing their patent system.

*An important exception in India’s patent law is that new drug products must offer substantial new efficacy relative to existing products. This has been at the center of Novartis’ patent disputes in India.

This live infographic dynamically shows the number of pending patent expirations by year for the next ten years.

For more infographics, see the DrugPatentWatch Pharmaceutical Innovation Infographics.

Do you have a response to this infographic? Respond in the comments section below.

I continue to measure global biotechnology innovation in the fifth  edition of Scientific American Worldview. This special publication is the foundation I use for my talks on global biotechnology (see my recent talk on Building Biotechnology in India).

I will be serving on a panel on April 24th at 2pm, and Fareed Zakaria will be moderating a discussion with industry leaders at 3:30.

In addition to the comparative global biotechnology innovation scorecard which I edit, Worldview also includes subjective stories of global innovation, highlights of selected countries, and profiles of industry leaders.

I look forward to your comments and critiques — check out Scientific American Worldview at http://www.saworldview.com

This infographic from DrugPatentWatch shows that Sanofi Aventis Us, Merck, Glaxosmithkline, Abbvie, Abraxis Bioscience, Genzyme, Abbott Endocrine,Boehringer Ingelheim, Merck And Co Inc, and Vyteris face the most patent expirations this year. Perhaps not surprisingly, GlaxoSmithKline and Sanofi Aventis are also among the firms with the most drug patents.

For more infographics, see the DrugPatentWatch Pharmaceutical Innovation Infographics.

Do you have a response to this infographic? Respond in the comments section below.

Join Michael Salgaller and I as we will be signing our books at the BIO bookstore on Tuesday April 23rd.

Michael will be signing Biotechnology Entrepreneurship From Science to Solutions from 12:30 to 2pm.

I will be signing Building Biotechnology, Best Practices in Biotechnology Business Development, the Journal of Commercial Biotechnology, and also giving demos of DrugPatentWatch.com and BiologicPatentWatch.com from 2pm – 3:30.

Stop by to chat about or books, or for a casual conversation.