Two rival biotechnology companies in California are locked in a legal
battle over ownership of a mouse with a human immune system. Cell Genesys,
a company based in Foster City just south of San Francisco, and its neighbour,
GenPharm International, both claim to have made a mouse that produces human
antibodies.
Cell Genesys has accused its rival of commercial espionage, and is claiming
millions of dollars in damages from the company. Steve Sherwin, president
of Cell Genesys, claims that a consultant who worked for both companies
passed details of Cell Genesys鈥檚 research to GenPharm.
For many years, doctors have used antibodies from a variety of animals
鈥� from mice to horses 鈥� to diagnose human diseases and target diseased tissue.
Mice injected with a human pathogen generate antibodies to fight it. Immunologists
can extract these antibodies from the animals and produce large quantities
of them in cell cultures. Unfortunately, people treated with mouse antibodies
sometimes suffer serious reactions, because their bodies recognise the antibodies
as foreign material.
Advertisement
Cell Genesys and GenPharm have been tackling this problem by genetically
altering mice so that they produce human anti-bodies rather than mouse antibodies.
To do this, they had to deactivate the mouse鈥檚 own immune system and insert
the genetic instructions for making human antibodies. The mice could be
used to produce antibodies that would help diagnose and treat a wide range
of diseases: killing invading bacteria, or locating and destroying cancer
cells, for example.
Both companies claim to have made mice that produce whole human antibodies
鈥� something no one else had done before 鈥� and expect their work to be published
shortly. But Cell Genesys alleges that GenPharm stole its technology for
鈥榢nocking out鈥� the mouse immune system.
In its suit against GenPharm, Cell Genesys claims that Frederick Alt,
a former professor of genetics at Columbia University in New York, passed
confidential information to GenPharm about Cell Genesys鈥檚 鈥榞ene inactivation鈥�
technique for disabling a mouse鈥檚 immune system. Alt became a scientific
consultant to Cell Genesys in August 1989, and signed a five-year agreement
鈥榯o maintain the confidentiality of all Cell Genesys鈥檚 proprietary information鈥�.
Cell Genesys鈥檚 suit, filed at the Santa Clara county court, states that
Alt first learnt of the concept behind the knock-out technology at a meeting
with Cell Genesys staff at La Guardia Airport in New York in October 1989.
At a meeting on 25 January 1990, Cell Genesys gave Alt written details of
the technology.
According to Cell Genesys, Alt said at this meeting that he was also
working for another biotechnology company called the Genetics Institute
in Boston. Between April and June 1990, says Cell Genesys, Alt informed
the company that the Genetics Institute and GenPharm were considering a
鈥榖usiness arrangement鈥� which meant he would be acting as consultant for
both. Cell Genesys alleges that GenPharm persuaded Alt to disclose details
of its knock-out technique.
In August 1990, GenPharm applied for a patent on its mouse. The patent
describes how to disable the mouse immune system. Cell Genesys had filed
a patent application for its mouse six months earlier. Cell Genesys is seeking
punitive damages from GenPharm worth millions of dollars. It alleges that
GenPharm鈥檚 technique is 鈥榮trikingly similar鈥� and 鈥榗annot be attributed to
mere chance or coincidence鈥�.
GenPharm rejects the allegations, and says it will mount a 鈥榲igorous鈥�
defence. 鈥楾he allegation is that we knowingly received confidential information,鈥�
says Jonathan MacQuitty, chief executive of GenPharm. 鈥楾hat鈥檚 not true.鈥�
Alt, who is now professor of genetics at the Children鈥檚 Hospital in
Boston, issued a statement last week saying: 鈥楾here鈥檚 no foundation in fact
for the accusations of Cell Genesys . . . I began serving as a consultant
to GenPharm in October 1991, after the time that the Cell Genesys patent
in question had been published. GenPharm has never asked me to disclose
information proprietary to Cell Genesys, and I have never volunteered such
颈苍蹿辞谤尘补迟颈辞苍.鈥�
MacQuitty says GenPharm has around a hundred of the engineered mice
making human antibodies. He fears that the litigation could slow down the
company鈥檚 work with antibodies that might be used to treat autoimmune diseases,
such as arthritis and multiple sclerosis. 鈥業t certainly does put a crimp
in our plans to use these clinically,鈥� he says. 鈥業 think the litigation
is unfortunate.鈥�
Sherwin says he, too, regrets that his company is having to press the
action. 鈥業n business, these things come up from time to time,鈥� he says.
