MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2924518656 · doi:10.1089/biores.2018.0028

Patent Application Trends of Induced Pluripotent Stem Cell Technologies in the United States, Japanese, and European Applications

2019· review· en· W2924518656 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Yasushi Morita, Hanayuki Okura, Akifumi Matsuyama

Bibliographic record

VenueBioResearch open access · 2019
Typereview
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicPluripotent Stem Cells Research
Canadian institutionsnot available
FundersJapan Agency for Medical Research and Development
KeywordsEuropean patent officeInduced pluripotent stem cellEmerging technologiesPatent analysisEuropean unionBusinessMedicineNanotechnologyEmbryonic stem cellInternational tradeComputer scienceBiologyGeneticsData science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Patent application trends were investigated for induced pluripotent stem cell (iPSC) technologies, particularly disease-specific cell technologies related to iPSCs, in the U.S., Japanese, and European applications during 2017. The number of patent applications for iPSC technologies was 1516 in the United States, 895 in Japan, and 420 in Europe, with 5% of applications for disease-specific cell technologies. In contrast, the percentages of patent applications for iPSC preparation and differentiation technologies were 17% and 23%, respectively. Patent applications for disease-specific cell technologies were classified into four technical fields and 14 disorder groups. In the technical fields, patent applications for genetically engineered cell technologies were prominent, accounting for 63%, 50%, and 65% of the U.S., Japanese, and European applications for 11, 8, and 7 disorder groups, respectively. In the disorder groups, the percentages of patent applications for neurological disorders were 40%, 32%, and 40% of the U.S., Japanese, and European applications, respectively, which were filed in four technical fields in the U.S. and Japanese applications. The U.S. patent applications for disease-specific cell technologies were filed by applicants in the United States, Japan, France, Belgium, Italy, Korea, and Canada; however, patent applications filed by those in Belgium, Italy, and Canada were not found in the Japanese and European applications. The percentages of patent applications filed by the U.S. applicants were 72%, 55%, and 65% of the U.S., Japanese, and European applications, respectively. Most patent applications filed by the U.S. applicants were in the field of genetically engineered cells for 11 disorder groups, which mostly included neurological and blood disorders. Japanese applicants mainly filed patent applications for drug screening technologies; subjects included five disorder groups, particularly neurological and bone/articular disorders. French applicants filed patent applications for neurological disorders in the field of genetically engineered cells and drug screening technologies. Korean applicants filed patent applications for patient-derived cell technologies for neurological, metabolic, and chromosomal/genetic disorders. In conclusion, more than half of patent applications were for genetically engineered cells for 11 disorders, most of which were filed by U.S. applicants.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.002
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Open science
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.995
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0020.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.002
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0070.006
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.186
GPT teacher head0.426
Teacher spread0.240 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations9
Published2019
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueBioResearch open accessSame topicPluripotent Stem Cells ResearchFrench-language works237,207