↓ Skip to main content

Intellectual property considerations for molecular diagnostic development with emphasis on companion diagnostics

Overview of attention for article published in Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents, December 2017
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
4 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
19 Mendeley
Title
Intellectual property considerations for molecular diagnostic development with emphasis on companion diagnostics
Published in
Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents, December 2017
DOI 10.1080/13543776.2018.1409209
Pubmed ID
Authors

Harry Glorikian, Richard Jeremy Warburg, Kelly Moore, Jennifer Malinowski

Abstract

The development of molecular diagnostics is a complex endeavor, with multiple regulatory pathways to consider and numerous approaches to development and commercialization. Companion diagnostics, devices which are "essential for the safe and effective use of a corresponding drug or diagnostic product" (see U.S. Food & Drug Administration, In Vitro Diagnostics - Companion Diagnostics, U.S. Dept. of Health & Human Services(2016), available at https://www.fda.gov/medicaldevices/productsandmedicalprocedures/invitrodiagnostics/ucm407297.htm ) and complementary diagnostics, which are more broadly associated with a class of drug, are becoming increasingly important as integral components of the implementation of precision medicine. Areas covered: The following article will highlight the intellectual property ('IP') considerations pertinent to molecular diagnostics development with special emphasis on companion diagnostics. Expert opinion/commentary Summary: For all molecular diagnostics, intellectual property (IP) concerns are of paramount concern, whether the device will be marketed only in the United States or abroad. Taking steps to protect IP at each stage of product development is critical to optimize profitability of a diagnostic product. Also the legal framework around IP protection of diagnostic technologies has been changing over the previous few years and can be expected to continue to change in the foreseeable near future, thus, a comprehensive IP strategy should take into account the fact that changes in the law can be expected.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 19 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 19 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 4 21%
Other 2 11%
Student > Ph. D. Student 2 11%
Librarian 1 5%
Professor 1 5%
Other 2 11%
Unknown 7 37%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Medicine and Dentistry 3 16%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 11%
Business, Management and Accounting 2 11%
Immunology and Microbiology 1 5%
Physics and Astronomy 1 5%
Other 3 16%
Unknown 7 37%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 11 December 2017.
All research outputs
#18,578,649
of 23,011,300 outputs
Outputs from Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents
#1,154
of 1,305 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#327,281
of 439,491 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Expert Opinion on Therapeutic Patents
#5
of 6 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,011,300 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 11th percentile – i.e., 11% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,305 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.8. This one is in the 5th percentile – i.e., 5% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 439,491 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 14th percentile – i.e., 14% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 6 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one.