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.
127 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 38424474)
21. 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]
22. MYRIAD VOICES AGAINST GENE PATENTS IN THE HIGH COURT. McCallum L; Faunce T J Law Med; 2015 Dec; 23(2):322-9. PubMed ID: 26939499 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
23. Patentability of genetically engineered microorganisms. Cooper A JAMA; 1983 Mar; 249(12):1553-4. PubMed ID: 6338261 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
24. LabCorp v. Metabolite Laboratories: The Supreme Court listens, but declines to speak. Klein RD; Mahoney MJ J Law Med Ethics; 2008; 36(1):141-9, 4. PubMed ID: 18315767 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
25. The Impact of Myriad on the Future Development and Commercialization of DNA-Based Therapies and Diagnostics. Wales M; Cartier E Cold Spring Harb Perspect Med; 2015 Sep; 5(12):. PubMed ID: 26337114 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
26. Patents for life forms: an inappropriate response to biotechnological advancement. Densberger JE J Bioeth; 1984; 5(2):91-115. PubMed ID: 11649700 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
27. 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]
28. Prometheus: the Supreme Court redefines the patentability of diagnostic inventions. Kumamoto A; Schmid CL Recent Pat DNA Gene Seq; 2012 Dec; 6(3):193-6. PubMed ID: 22812581 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
29. Patent law--man-made, living microorganisms held patentable subject matter under section 101 of the Patent Act--Diamond v. Chakrabarty, 447 U.S. 303 (1980). Faggen N Temple Law Q; 1981; 54(2):308-30. PubMed ID: 11652407 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
30. Patents. U.S. Supreme Court delves into what is and isn't patentable. Marshall E Science; 2009 Jun; 324(5933):1374. PubMed ID: 19520926 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
31. An overview of a recent court challenge to the protection of biomarkers as intellectual property. Hall SC; Tromp JM; Jortani SA Clin Chim Acta; 2011 May; 412(11-12):802-5. PubMed ID: 21315704 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
32. Patenting a living microbial cell: 40th anniversary of US Supreme Court decision Diamond versus Chakrabarty. Silver S FEMS Microbiol Lett; 2020 Jul; 367(13):. PubMed ID: 32501475 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
33. 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]
35. AMP v Myriad: the Supreme Court gives a win to personalized medicine. Klein RD J Mol Diagn; 2013 Nov; 15(6):731-2. PubMed ID: 24139185 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
36. US Supreme Court may have to settle dispute over patenting DNA sequences. Dyer C BMJ; 2011 Sep; 343():d6187. PubMed ID: 21952463 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
37. Patent law: live, human-made microorganisms are patentable subject matter under 35 U.S.C. Sect. 101--Diamond v. Chakrabarty. Namei FT Univ Cincinnati Law Rev; 1980; 49(4):902-13. PubMed ID: 11650489 [No Abstract] [Full Text] [Related]
38. Myriad Genetics: In the eye of the policy storm. Gold ER; Carbone J Genet Med; 2010 Apr; 12(4 Suppl):S39-70. PubMed ID: 20393310 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]
39. Impact of gene patents and licensing practices on access to genetic testing for inherited susceptibility to cancer: comparing breast and ovarian cancers with colon cancers. Cook-Deegan R; DeRienzo C; Carbone J; Chandrasekharan S; Heaney C; Conover C Genet Med; 2010 Apr; 12(4 Suppl):S15-38. PubMed ID: 20393305 [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]