BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

325 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 16144099)

  • 1. Moore v. Regents of the University of California: patients, property rights, and public policy.
    Biagi KG
    St Louis Univ Law J; 1991; 35(2):433-62. PubMed ID: 16144099
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Proprietary rights in body parts: the relevance of Moore's case in Australia.
    Mortimer D
    Monash Univ Law Rev; 1993; 19(1):217-25. PubMed ID: 17333577
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Patient autonomy and biomedical research: judicial compromise in Moore v. Regents of the University of California.
    LoBiondo AR
    Albany Law J Sci Technol; 1991; 1():277-305. PubMed ID: 16281328
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Moore v. Regents of the University of California: expanded disclosure, limited property rights.
    Potts J
    Northwest Univ Law Rev; 1992; 86(2):453-96. PubMed ID: 11659500
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Beyond Moore: issues of law and policy impacting human cell and genetic research in the age of biotechnology.
    Hartman RG
    J Leg Med; 1993 Sep; 14(3):463-77. PubMed ID: 7779167
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Biotechnology: a challenge for Hippocrates.
    Huynen S
    Auckl Univ Law Rev; 1991; 6(4):534-51. PubMed ID: 16127862
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Living tissue and organ donors and property law: more on Moore.
    Dickens BM
    J Contemp Health Law Policy; 1992; 8():73-93. PubMed ID: 10183665
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Moore v. The Regents of the University of California: an ethical debate on informed consent and property rights in a patient's cells.
    Prowda JB
    J Pat Trademark Off Soc; 1995 Aug; 77(8):611-39. PubMed ID: 11658094
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Research that could yield marketable products from human materials: the problem of informed consent.
    Levine RJ
    IRB; 1986; 8(1):6-7. PubMed ID: 11649703
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Biotechnology, patients' rights, and the Moore case.
    Howard JJ
    Food Drug Cosmet Law J; 1989 Jul; 44(4):331-58. PubMed ID: 11659209
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Taking the least of you: most of us have tissue or blood samples on file somewhere, whether we know it or not. What we don't typically know is what research they are being used for or how much money is being made from them. And science may want to keep things that way.
    Skloot R
    N Y Times Mag; 2006 Apr; ():38-45, 75, 79, 81. PubMed ID: 16715570
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. A question of property rights in the human body.
    Marusyk RW; Swain MS
    Ottawa Law Rev; 1989; 21(2):351-86. PubMed ID: 16086463
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Controlling conflicts of interest in the doctor-patient relationship: lessons from Moore v. Regents of the University of California.
    Healey JM; Dowling KL
    Mercer Law Rev; 1991; 42(3):989-1005. PubMed ID: 11651440
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Owning the secret of life: biotechnology and property rights revisited.
    Yelpaala K
    McGeorge Law Rev; 2000; 32(1):111-219. PubMed ID: 15709267
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Biotechnology and the commercial use of human cells: toward an organic view of life and technology.
    Martin PA; Lagod ML
    Santa Clara Comput High Technol Law J; 1989 Jun; 5(2):211-61. PubMed ID: 11659674
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Who owns the body? On the ethics of using human tissues for commercial purposes.
    Murray TH
    IRB; 1986; 8(1):1-5. PubMed ID: 11649702
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Informed consent: defining limits through therapeutic parameters.
    Daar JF
    Whittier Law Rev; 1995; 16(1):187-209. PubMed ID: 11660487
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Moore v. Regents of the University of California.
    California. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 4
    Wests Calif Report; 1988 Jul; 249():494-540. PubMed ID: 11648571
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Toward a just model of alienability of human tissue.
    Budds B
    Univ San Francisco Law Rev; 2003; 37(3):757-82. PubMed ID: 16514784
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Whose waste is it anyway? The case of John Moore.
    Annas GJ
    Hastings Cent Rep; 1988; 18(5):37-9. PubMed ID: 3066788
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 17.