These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

145 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 17549930)

  • 1. "No compensation" or "pro compensation": Moore v. Regents and default rules for human tissue donations.
    Korobkin R
    J Health Law; 2007; 40(1):1-27. PubMed ID: 17549930
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. 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]  

  • 3. 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]  

  • 4. The recognition of proprietary rights in human tissue in common law jurisdictions.
    Magnusson RS
    Melb Univ Law Rev; 1992 Jun; 18():601-29. PubMed ID: 16523581
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. 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]  

  • 6. 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]  

  • 7. 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]  

  • 8. Neither Moore nor the market: alternative models for compensating contributors of human tissue.
    Harrison CH
    Am J Law Med; 2002; 28(1):77-105. PubMed ID: 12025539
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. 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]  

  • 10. Intellectual property and biotechnology: the U.S. internal experience--Part I.
    Brody B
    Kennedy Inst Ethics J; 2006 Mar; 16(1):1-37. PubMed ID: 16770885
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. 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]  

  • 12. Court rules cells are the patient's property.
    Crawford M
    Science; 1988 Aug; 241(4866):653-4. PubMed ID: 3399896
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. 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]  

  • 14. A disputed spleen.
    Brahams D
    Lancet; 1988 Nov; 2(8620):1151-2. PubMed ID: 2903372
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. 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]  

  • 16. Patenting life: a view from the constitution and beyond.
    Schneider CA; Cohn F; Bonner C
    Whittier Law Rev; 2002; 24(2):385-416. PubMed ID: 15085853
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. 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]  

  • 18. Property rights and payment to patients for cell lines derived from human tissues: an economic analysis.
    Greenberg W; Kamin D
    Soc Sci Med; 1993 Apr; 36(8):1071-6. PubMed ID: 8475423
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Cloning human organs: potential sources and property implications.
    Hilmert LJ
    Indiana Law J; 2002; 77(2):363-87. PubMed ID: 15174442
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. 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]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.