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 *

148 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 30900262)

  • 1. The continuing saga of patents and non-invasive prenatal testing.
    Hawkins N; Nicol D; Chandrasekharan S; Cook-Deegan R
    Prenat Diagn; 2019 May; 39(6):441-447. PubMed ID: 30900262
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Do patents impede the provision of genetic tests in Australia?
    Nicol D; Liddicoat J
    Aust Health Rev; 2013 Jun; 37(3):281-5. PubMed ID: 23702081
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Is there still a place for gene patents in Australia? Implications of recent United States and European case law.
    Ridley A; Nicol D
    J Law Med; 2011 Dec; 19(2):282-99. PubMed ID: 22320004
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Do recent US Supreme Court rulings on patenting of genes and genetic diagnostics affect the practice of genetic screening and diagnosis in prenatal and reproductive care?
    Chandrasekharan S; McGuire AL; Van den Veyver IB
    Prenat Diagn; 2014 Oct; 34(10):921-6. PubMed ID: 24989832
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Implementation of cell-free DNA-based non-invasive prenatal testing in a National Health Service Regional Genetics Laboratory.
    Togneri FS; Kilby MD; Young E; Court S; Williams D; Griffiths MJ; Allen SK
    Genet Res (Camb); 2019 Dec; 101():e11. PubMed ID: 31813398
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Commercial landscape of noninvasive prenatal testing in the United States.
    Agarwal A; Sayres LC; Cho MK; Cook-Deegan R; Chandrasekharan S
    Prenat Diagn; 2013 Jun; 33(6):521-31. PubMed ID: 23686656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Continental drift? Do European clinical genetic testing laboratories have a patent problem?
    Liddicoat J; Liddell K; McCarthy AH; Hogarth S; Aboy M; Nicol D; Patton S; Hopkins MM
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2019 Jul; 27(7):997-1007. PubMed ID: 30846855
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Fortune and hindsight: gene patents' muted effect on medical practice.
    Sherkow JS; Abbott R
    Br Med Bull; 2018 Jun; 126(1):37-45. PubMed ID: 29608656
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Patents and the supply of therapeutic products.
    Hayhurst WL
    Law Med Health Care; 1992; 20(3):235-7. PubMed ID: 1434767
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Impact of gene patents on diagnostic testing: a new patent landscaping method applied to spinocerebellar ataxia.
    Berthels N; Matthijs G; Van Overwalle G
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2011 Nov; 19(11):1114-21. PubMed ID: 21811306
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Sequenom v. Ariosa - The Death of a Genetic Testing Patent.
    Cook-Deegan R; Chandrasekharan S
    N Engl J Med; 2016 Dec; 375(25):2418-2419. PubMed ID: 28002697
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Current use of noninvasive prenatal testing in Europe, Australia and the USA: A graphical presentation.
    Gadsbøll K; Petersen OB; Gatinois V; Strange H; Jacobsson B; Wapner R; Vermeesch JR; ; Vogel I
    Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand; 2020 Jun; 99(6):722-730. PubMed ID: 32176318
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Limits to the scope of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT): an analysis of the international ethical framework for prenatal screening and an interview study with Dutch professionals.
    Kater-Kuipers A; Bunnik EM; de Beaufort ID; Galjaard RJH
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2018 Oct; 18(1):409. PubMed ID: 30340550
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. The impact of human gene patents on genetic testing in the United Kingdom.
    Hawkins N
    Genet Med; 2011 Apr; 13(4):320-4. PubMed ID: 21150786
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Recent trends in prenatal genetic screening and testing.
    Pös O; Budiš J; Szemes T
    F1000Res; 2019; 8():. PubMed ID: 31214330
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. Myriad and the mass media: the covering of a gene patent controversy.
    Caulfield T; Bubela T; Murdoch CJ
    Genet Med; 2007 Dec; 9(12):850-5. PubMed ID: 18091435
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Evaluation of non-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) for aneuploidy in an NHS setting: a reliable accurate prenatal non-invasive diagnosis (RAPID) protocol.
    Hill M; Wright D; Daley R; Lewis C; McKay F; Mason S; Lench N; Howarth A; Boustred C; Lo K; Plagnol V; Spencer K; Fisher J; Kroese M; Morris S; Chitty LS
    BMC Pregnancy Childbirth; 2014 Jul; 14():229. PubMed ID: 25027965
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Gene and genetic diagnostic method patent claims: a comparison under current European and US patent law.
    Huys I; Van Overwalle G; Matthijs G
    Eur J Hum Genet; 2011 Oct; 19(10):1104-7. PubMed ID: 21654725
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Genetic testing, ethical concerns, and the role of patent law.
    Caulfield TA; Gold ER
    Clin Genet; 2000 May; 57(5):370-5. PubMed ID: 10852371
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Emerging patent issues in genomic diagnostics.
    Barton JH
    Nat Biotechnol; 2006 Aug; 24(8):939-41. PubMed ID: 16900135
    [No Abstract]   [Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 8.