Post by icemandios on Nov 10, 2021 16:33:02 GMT
November 9, 2021 04:25 PM ESTUpdated 3 hours ago Coronavirus
Moderna and NIH can't agree on who invented the lifesaving Covid-19 vaccine, and their feud is now public — report
Max Gelman
Editor
Moderna’s ongoing feud with the NIH over Covid-19 vaccine patents has spilled into the open.
In a new report from the New York Times published Tuesday afternoon, Moderna is asserting that three NIH scientists were not involved in inventing the key component in the biotech’s vaccine, to the surprise of the institute. The claim comes from a July filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office, which the NYT posted in full along with its report.
Within the filing, Moderna said it had “reached the good-faith determination” that three NIH scientists — John Mascola, Barney Graham and Kizzmekia Corbett — “did not co-invent” the sequence that prompts the body’s immune response to the coronavirus spike protein. The NIH, meanwhile, says the trio worked with Moderna at the outset of the pandemic to design the component in question.
In response to an Endpoints News request for comment, a Moderna spokesperson said the company has “all along” recognized the role the NIH played in developing the Covid-19 shot. But the spokesperson insisted only Moderna scientists invented mRNA-1273 — the codename for the company’s vaccine.
The spokesperson also claimed that Moderna wasn’t not allowed to “choose” who to list on the patent application, per US law. It’s not clear to which law or laws Moderna is referring to.
“Following those rules, as we must, Moderna is required to only list Moderna scientists as the inventors for the patent claims to mRNA-1273,” the spokesperson wrote in an email. “Moderna’s conclusion is driven by nothing other than our obligation to comply with U.S. patent law.”
Endpoints has also reached out to the NIH and will update this story accordingly.
The patent has not yet been issued, and the NIH is reportedly insisting the three scientists be included on the application.
At the center of the debate is whether Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine originally sprung from a collaboration between the biotech and the institute, as the pair had been researching other coronaviruses for four years when SARS-CoV-2 first emerged. The NIH called the shot the “NIH-Moderna vaccine” in press releases last year at the Phase III readout, though Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel pushed back on that description in an interview with MIT Technology Review.
Should the PTO issue Moderna a patent based on the current application, the government would have to go to court to obtain a license. It’s not clear when the PTO is expected to make its decision.
Moderna’s back-and-forth with the NIH has been ongoing for over a year now. The NYT reports that the agency would not need Moderna’s permission to license the vaccine technology to other companies, countries or organizations if the scientists are named on the patent. Such a move could, theoretically, help boost vaccine supply.
The biotech has said previously it won’t enforce its patents during the pandemic, but the NIH backing would provide the authority of the US government rather than just a public company statement. The NIH could also benefit financially from its researchers being listed, though it’s not clear how much, the NYT’s report says.
Tuesday’s report comes as President Joe Biden’s administration has been ramping up pressure and criticism on Moderna for primarily selling vaccines to wealthier countries, despite pulling in billions of dollars in profits, and resisting calls to share its vaccine IP. Last week, Public Citizen also called on Moderna to “clarify” the NIH’s role in inventing the vaccine tech in a letter to agency director Francis Collins.
In the new book A Shot to Save the World out last month detailing the inventions of the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, Wall Street Journal reporter Gregory Zuckerman wrote the three NIH scientists in question designed a sequence for a vaccine and sent it to Moderna. The biotech then used it to confirm their own designs and produce that vaccine.
Zuckerman wrote:
On Thursday, January 23, Wang packed his material in a container, trying hard to ensure it didn’t leak, and shipped it all to Kizzmekia Corbett, the government scientist who was doing similar work with other’s in Graham’s lab. Corbett, Graham and John Mascola chose an ideal spike-protein design and sent it to Moderna. The company’s scientists, relying on McLellan and Wang’s earlier work, had built their own spike-protein design. It matched the one from the government scientists, confirming they made the right choice. Moderna took their chosen sequence, employed some sophisticated computer software, and built an mRNA molecule capable of producing the stabilized spike protein. This would become Moderna’s vaccine antigen.
This story has been updated with comment from Moderna and a passage from Gregory Zuckerman’s book, A Shot to Save the World.
Moderna and NIH can't agree on who invented the lifesaving Covid-19 vaccine, and their feud is now public — report
Max Gelman
Editor
Moderna’s ongoing feud with the NIH over Covid-19 vaccine patents has spilled into the open.
In a new report from the New York Times published Tuesday afternoon, Moderna is asserting that three NIH scientists were not involved in inventing the key component in the biotech’s vaccine, to the surprise of the institute. The claim comes from a July filing with the US Patent and Trademark Office, which the NYT posted in full along with its report.
Within the filing, Moderna said it had “reached the good-faith determination” that three NIH scientists — John Mascola, Barney Graham and Kizzmekia Corbett — “did not co-invent” the sequence that prompts the body’s immune response to the coronavirus spike protein. The NIH, meanwhile, says the trio worked with Moderna at the outset of the pandemic to design the component in question.
In response to an Endpoints News request for comment, a Moderna spokesperson said the company has “all along” recognized the role the NIH played in developing the Covid-19 shot. But the spokesperson insisted only Moderna scientists invented mRNA-1273 — the codename for the company’s vaccine.
The spokesperson also claimed that Moderna wasn’t not allowed to “choose” who to list on the patent application, per US law. It’s not clear to which law or laws Moderna is referring to.
“Following those rules, as we must, Moderna is required to only list Moderna scientists as the inventors for the patent claims to mRNA-1273,” the spokesperson wrote in an email. “Moderna’s conclusion is driven by nothing other than our obligation to comply with U.S. patent law.”
Endpoints has also reached out to the NIH and will update this story accordingly.
The patent has not yet been issued, and the NIH is reportedly insisting the three scientists be included on the application.
At the center of the debate is whether Moderna’s Covid-19 vaccine originally sprung from a collaboration between the biotech and the institute, as the pair had been researching other coronaviruses for four years when SARS-CoV-2 first emerged. The NIH called the shot the “NIH-Moderna vaccine” in press releases last year at the Phase III readout, though Moderna CEO Stéphane Bancel pushed back on that description in an interview with MIT Technology Review.
Should the PTO issue Moderna a patent based on the current application, the government would have to go to court to obtain a license. It’s not clear when the PTO is expected to make its decision.
Moderna’s back-and-forth with the NIH has been ongoing for over a year now. The NYT reports that the agency would not need Moderna’s permission to license the vaccine technology to other companies, countries or organizations if the scientists are named on the patent. Such a move could, theoretically, help boost vaccine supply.
The biotech has said previously it won’t enforce its patents during the pandemic, but the NIH backing would provide the authority of the US government rather than just a public company statement. The NIH could also benefit financially from its researchers being listed, though it’s not clear how much, the NYT’s report says.
Tuesday’s report comes as President Joe Biden’s administration has been ramping up pressure and criticism on Moderna for primarily selling vaccines to wealthier countries, despite pulling in billions of dollars in profits, and resisting calls to share its vaccine IP. Last week, Public Citizen also called on Moderna to “clarify” the NIH’s role in inventing the vaccine tech in a letter to agency director Francis Collins.
In the new book A Shot to Save the World out last month detailing the inventions of the mRNA Covid-19 vaccines, Wall Street Journal reporter Gregory Zuckerman wrote the three NIH scientists in question designed a sequence for a vaccine and sent it to Moderna. The biotech then used it to confirm their own designs and produce that vaccine.
Zuckerman wrote:
On Thursday, January 23, Wang packed his material in a container, trying hard to ensure it didn’t leak, and shipped it all to Kizzmekia Corbett, the government scientist who was doing similar work with other’s in Graham’s lab. Corbett, Graham and John Mascola chose an ideal spike-protein design and sent it to Moderna. The company’s scientists, relying on McLellan and Wang’s earlier work, had built their own spike-protein design. It matched the one from the government scientists, confirming they made the right choice. Moderna took their chosen sequence, employed some sophisticated computer software, and built an mRNA molecule capable of producing the stabilized spike protein. This would become Moderna’s vaccine antigen.
This story has been updated with comment from Moderna and a passage from Gregory Zuckerman’s book, A Shot to Save the World.