Ramadoss Magesh, who has been diligently running a cancer support blog for more than two years now, linking to news, developments and useful information on the issue, writes on a recent ruling of the Madras HC on a petition filed by the pharma giant Novartis. Magesh looks at the larger issues of costly research on the one hand and critical healthcare on the other, and the impact of new patent laws on both from all angles- from the perspective of patients, patent claimants, regulators and also offers ideas on who should bear the burden of expensive research involved in developing new molecules and medicines:

Novartis had claimed a patent for their anti-cancer drug Gleevec (known in India as Glivec). The cost of Glivec for a patient for one year is around 1.4 million INR, while other companies sell the generic version of the drug at about 1/10th of that price. The patent was denied by the Court on the basis of Section 3d of the Indian patent law which disallows patents for incrementally small innovations.

Had the case gone in favor of Novartis, it would have prevented the generic manufacturers from producing the drug at all. This case was very keenly followed by the international pharmaceutical industry, global relief organizations working for greater access to public health and generic drug manufacturers. There are about 9000 patent applications pending before the courts, most of them reflecting a scenario similar to this one. The way these cases are settled would thus have a profound influence on the production and sale of drugs for a wide range of diseases affecting the world.