Comments on: Patent Dispute Prevents Patients From Getting Promising Drug for Lou Gehrig’s Disease

By: Mike Olson

Mike Olson — Sat, 01 Aug 2009 12:50:14 +0000

I can only agree with what has already been said. But, I figure by posting, I’m rewarding the author with greater response numbers, which in turn will lead to more posts of a similar nature. Thanks for posting this.

By: MMORPG

MMORPG — Wed, 29 Jul 2009 05:20:05 +0000

That’s lame, those patients need those durgs, I find it absurd that patents are preventing it.

By: Kevin

Kevin — Sat, 11 Jul 2009 11:58:49 +0000

Thanks for this post. My friend living near the Eiffel Tower may need to look into this. However, I am skeptical at drug companies and their promises. I wonder if this will be another one of those "lifetime treatments" or cures.

By: Julie Simon Lakehomer

Julie Simon Lakehomer — Tue, 07 Jul 2009 12:02:26 +0000

Hi, again, Rebecca, I’m so glad to read not only this blog entry, but the article in Slate. I was appalled when this gene patenting began with the Human Genome Project. But your Slate article give great reasons why it’s an inhuman practice, and great examples of other such inhuman practices. Problem is the “Bush” Court. Gotta up my ACLU donation.

By: Comrade PhysioProf

Comrade PhysioProf — Sat, 06 Jun 2009 11:06:40 +0000

Sklooty! Come back!

By: Nils Ross

Nils Ross — Tue, 19 May 2009 05:08:06 +0000

I’m not sure I understand. Why isn’t the patent holder simply demanding a cut of the profits, or else manufacturing the drug themselves?

By: Graham Steel

Graham Steel — Sun, 17 May 2009 14:22:39 +0000

Thanks for blogging about this, Rebecca.
As you say, “it does raise some relevant questions about the intersection of patents and medical care”.
–
An informative link supplied already c/o David which I’ve added to this thread of the ALSTDI Forum:-

By: Rebecca Skloot

Rebecca Skloot — Sun, 17 May 2009 12:52:42 +0000

Huh, that’s interesting. Thanks for posting. Will take a look.

By: David

David — Sun, 17 May 2009 12:43:39 +0000

The FDA posting is a pretty good summary of the evidence (http://www.fda.gov/cder/drug/infopage/mecasermin_rinfabate/default.htm). This page also links to the Italian summary and a statement from the sponsor company. In the FDA’s review of available evidence, Iplex was not significantly better than placebo in any of 5 controlled trials, and in 2 of these it was associated with a numerically higher death rate than placebo (though not statistically significant). Take a close look at the survival curve for the japanese study. The current round of enthusiasm is set of by the sponsor company presenting new uncontrolled data on a small cohort that looks promising.