"Moderna has paid $400 million to the government for a
chemical technique key to its vaccine. But the parties are still locked in a
high-stakes dispute over a different patent.
As Moderna racked up tens of billions of dollars in sales of
its coronavirus vaccine, the company held off on paying for the rights to a
chemical technique that scientists said it had borrowed from government-funded
research and used in its wildly successful shot.
But Moderna and the government have now reached an
agreement. The company said on Thursday that it had made a $400 million payment
for the technique that will be shared by the National Institutes of Health and
two American universities where the method was invented.
The payment, disclosed in Moderna’s latest earnings report,
represented a small victory for the experts and activists who long argued that
the company had resisted acknowledging its debt to the government and academic
researchers.
“If pharmaceutical companies are going to make billions of
dollars, it seems reasonable that the scientists who helped generate some of
the initial intellectual property and the universities also share some of the
gains,” said Jason McLellan, a structural biologist who in 2017 led efforts to
devise the technique in question as a researcher at the Geisel School of
Medicine at Dartmouth. “A lot of that will now be reinvested for future
development and research.”
Moderna is still locked in a separate high-stakes dispute
with the N.I.H. over who invented the central component of the vaccine, the
genetic sequence that helps recipients produce an immune response.
The N.I.H. said its scientists, some of whom had been
collaborating for years with Moderna, had helped to design that sequence.
Moderna also received nearly $10 billion in taxpayer funding to develop and
test the vaccine, and to provide doses to the federal government. The company
has sold roughly $36 billion worth of coronavirus vaccines worldwide.
But even as the fight over the sequence attracted public
attention, including suggestions from the N.I.H. that it might consider legal
action, another standoff played out largely in private, this one concerning the
chemical tweak that was the subject of the payments announced on Thursday.
That technique was integral to a number of coronavirus
vaccines, including Moderna’s, scientists said. It entailed changing the mRNA
code within the vaccines so that they would help people generate an immune
response to the version of spike proteins present on the surface of the
coronavirus before they fused with human cells.
It appeared indisputable to legal experts that government
and academic researchers had invented the technique. Scientists at Dartmouth,
Scripps Research, in California, and the N.I.H. published findings in 2017 and
filed for a patent. A patent was issued in 2021.
Other vaccine makers, too, acknowledged relying on those
researchers’ work. By the end of 2021, seven pharmaceutical companies had
agreed to pay the three institutions for the use of their technique. Among them
was BioNTech, whose coronavirus vaccine made with Pfizer became the main
competitor to Moderna’s.
But negotiations with Moderna were slower. The delay in
licensing the spike technology became another sore point between the company
and the government.
“Moderna has benefited richly from government largess, and
it does owe a public duty, but it’s been very begrudging and slow in
acknowledging that public duty,” said Lawrence Gostin, a professor of global
health law at Georgetown University.
Mr. Gostin said the agreement announced on Thursday, which
was finalized in December, was “a small token in the right direction.”
Chris Ridley, a Moderna spokesman, said in a statement that
the company and the government “have been engaged in productive discussions
since 2020 regarding the licensing of certain patents related to Covid-19
vaccines.” He added, “It was always our intention to reach an agreement, and we
were pleased to have done so this past December.”
The N.I.H. did not immediately answer questions about
negotiations with Moderna or whether it was still awaiting licensing fees from
any other vaccine makers.
Under the agreement with Moderna, the company made what it
described as a $400 million “catch-up payment” to the N.I.H. The government
will share that money with Dartmouth and Scripps. The individual scientists who
helped invent the technique are also likely to receive a portion of the
payment, experts said. Moderna said the agreement also required royalty
payments representing low single-digit percentages of future Covid-19 vaccine
sales.
The company has forecast Covid vaccine sales of $5 billion
for 2023.
The N.I.H. tends to be uneasy about aggressively asserting
legal rights to its work, experts said, a stance that some activists believe
hurts taxpayers who face high prices for medicines developed with government
funding and research. In the case of the dispute over the spike-protein
technique, experts said, the N.I.H. was in a particularly tricky position
because of its parallel fight over who ultimately invented the vaccine.
That put more of the onus on Dartmouth and Scripps to
encourage the government and Moderna to reach an agreement. For those
institutions, the potential licensing fees represented a significant opportunity
to pour money into the very same kinds of research that revealed how to modify
the spike protein in the first place.
“We’re doing it not to benefit shareholders,” said Kim
Rosenfield, Dartmouth’s director of technology transfer. “This money is going to
go right back into the kind of research that enables further lifesaving drugs
and into educating people.”
For a university of Dartmouth’s size, she said, the payments
were “game-changing.” Royalty payments for an earlier drug developed in part at
Dartmouth helped the university set up the research program where Dr. McLellan
worked, Ms. Rosenfield said. Now the payments for Dr. McLellan’s findings could
help cultivate future discoveries.
The university said that it had already received $117
million from vaccine makers that had reached earlier agreements to license the
spike technique.
Dr. McLellan had been working at Dartmouth to respond to an
outbreak of an earlier coronavirus — one that causes Middle East Respiratory
Syndrome, or MERS — when he developed the trick for modifying the spike. The
spikes on the surface of that virus, too, were squirmy and unstable, taking one
form before invading a cell and another afterward.
Dr. McLellan’s team, working with Dr. Barney Graham at the
N.I.H. and Andrew Ward at Scripps, knew that the spike needed to be locked in
place if it was to elicit the strongest possible immune response. After several
attempts failed, they zeroed in on a particularly loose joint of the spike and
added two stiff amino acids, a tweak that made the entire thing more rigid.
Philip Hanlon, the president of Dartmouth, said that it had
been a “thrilling moment” when the research had been harnessed for the
coronavirus vaccines. Ensuring that the university and its scientists were paid
for the work, he said, would set the stage for future research, especially
experiments risky and uncertain enough that pharmaceutical companies would
generally not think it worthwhile to carry them out themselves.
“I think this gives you a model for partnerships where the
basic, curiosity-based research did happen on a campus, and led to eventually
creating a product which saved millions of lives,” he said.”
Komentarų nėra:
Rašyti komentarą