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 *

225 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 26337114)

  • 41. Mayo, Myriad, America Invents Act and BPCIA: how has the United States biopharmaceutical market been affected?
    Finston SK; Davey NS; Davé E; Ravichandran V; Davey SR; Davé RS
    Pharm Pat Anal; 2016 May; 5(3):159-67. PubMed ID: 27087460
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 42. Patents. Signature on visitor's form fuels Stanford v. Roche court battle.
    Marshall E
    Science; 2011 Apr; 332(6026):163. PubMed ID: 21474725
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 43. KSR Int'l Co. v. Teleflex, Inc.: no obvious changes for the biotechnology market.
    Hinneschiedt CH
    Yale J Biol Med; 2007 Dec; 80(4):153-7. PubMed ID: 18449391
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 44. Pharmaceutical patent life-cycle management after KSR v. Teleflex.
    Furrow ME
    Food Drug Law J; 2008; 63(1):275-320. PubMed ID: 18561462
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 45. Life forms protectable as subjects of U.S. patents -- microbes to animals (perhaps).
    Hodgins DS
    Biomater Artif Cells Artif Organs; 1989; 17(2):205-24. PubMed ID: 2775879
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 46. Who reads patents?
    Ouellette LL
    Nat Biotechnol; 2017 May; 35(5):421-424. PubMed ID: 28486445
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 47. Competition policy in patent cases and antitrust.
    Sobel G
    Adv Genet; 2003; 50():23-64; discussion 507-10. PubMed ID: 14714685
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 48. Biomarkers unbound--the Supreme Court's ruling on diagnostic-test patents.
    Kesselheim AS; Karlawish J
    N Engl J Med; 2012 Jun; 366(25):2338-40. PubMed ID: 22621421
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 49. US Supreme Court rules on landmark gene patent case.
    Sklan A
    Pharm Pat Anal; 2013 Sep; 2(5):581. PubMed ID: 24237164
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 50. US personalized-medicine industry takes hit from Supreme Court.
    Ledford H
    Nature; 2016 Aug; 536(7617):382. PubMed ID: 27558042
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 51. Patentability of self-replicating technologies.
    Shear RH
    Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med; 2014 Sep; 5(1):a021071. PubMed ID: 25256175
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 52. Patentable subject matter, TRIPS and the European Biotechnology Directive: Australia and patenting human genes.
    Palombi L
    Univ N S W Law J; 2003; 26(3):782-92. PubMed ID: 16617532
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 53. [Patentability of DNA sequences: the debate remains open].
    Martín Uranga A
    Rev Derecho Genoma Hum; 2013; (39):83-95. PubMed ID: 24868958
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 54. Strategies for strengthening patent protection of pharmaceutical inventions in light of federal court decisions.
    Pillai X; Kinney WA
    Curr Top Med Chem; 2010; 10(18):1929-36. PubMed ID: 20615184
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 55. Muddying the waters: how the Supreme Court's decision in Merck v. Integra fails to resolve problems of judicial interpretation of 35 U.S.C. Section 271(E)(1), the "safe harbor" provision of the Hatch-Waxman Act.
    Sertic M
    Health Matrix Clevel; 2007; 17(2):377-439. PubMed ID: 18326397
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 56. After the Myriad decision: do hurdles remain for diagnostics competition?
    Waller PR; Young DW
    MLO Med Lab Obs; 2013 Sep; 45(9):46. PubMed ID: 24147337
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 57. Strategies for stem cell patent applications in the light of recent court cases.
    Eyre DE; Schlich GW
    Pharm Pat Anal; 2015; 4(6):431-41. PubMed ID: 26580992
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 58. An analysis of federal circuit discrimination: the evolution of the written description requirement vis-a-vis DNA and biotechnological inventions concerns for synthetic biology.
    Greenbaum D
    Recent Pat DNA Gene Seq; 2011 Dec; 5(3):153-65. PubMed ID: 21787273
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 59. Antibody-patent row could have far-reaching impact on biotech.
    Ledford H
    Nature; 2023 Apr; 616(7955):17. PubMed ID: 36977755
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 60. Patent protection for Aspergillus-related inventions.
    Jong SC; Birmingham JM
    Biotechnology; 1992; 23():297-311. PubMed ID: 1504603
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Previous]   [Next]    [New Search]
    of 12.