Kourosh Dastgheib, of Lebanon, Pa., claims he shared research materials with the biotechnology company in the mid-1990s that were key to developing Lucentis, which was approved by the Food and Drug Administration earlier this year to treat wet age-related macular degeneration. The disease can cause blindness, and studies have shown Lucentis to be effective in combating vision loss.
Dastgheib filed a lawsuit against Genentech in 2004, alleging it walked away from a 1995 agreement to pay him royalties of 1% of future sales of the drug and recognize his work in the scientific community, if he shared his research with the company. Dastgheib's lawyer suggested to the jury Tuesday Genentech should pay as much as $1.16 billion for his contribution.
But the nine-member jury in federal court in Philadelphia rejected Dastgheib's claims that Genentech was unjustly enriched by his alleged contribution, that it violated a North Carolina state law and that it committed fraud, according to Genentech attorney Kenneth Gallo. The nine-member jury reached the verdict one day after getting the case, following more than two weeks of testimony.
Genentech maintained there was no evidence of any agreement with Dastgheib, and that its payment of $2,000 to him in the mid-1990s was sufficient reimbursement for his work.
"We're very pleased that the jury agreed with Genentech that Doctor Dastgheib is not entitled to any proceeds from Lucentis," Genentech spokeswoman Robin Snyder said. "Our scientists and collaborators spent more than a decade in research-and-development efforts to bring this breakthrough treatment to patients. The company has invested hundreds of millions of dollars to support this R&D."
Dastgheib and his lawyers couldn't immediately be reached.
Genentech shares rose $1.39, or 1.7%, to $83.58 Wednesday.
Dastgheib had sent Genentech microscopic slides of human eye samples and other materials, which he claims were instrumental in confirming the presence of a substance known as vascular endothelial growth factor, or VEGF, in cases of wet AMD. Lucentis is designed to attack VEGF. Dastgheib was in a medical residency program at the time in North Carolina.
"He had a theory, he proved the theory, he wrote about it, and (Gententech) went to him to get what they needed," Dastgheib's lawyer, Raymond Niro, told jurors in closing statements Tuesday.
But Genentech's lawyer, Gallo, told jurors there was no agreement for Genentech to pay Dastgheib a 1% royalty and recognize his work in the scientific community. He said Genentech, of South San Francisco, Calif., sent him a $2,000 check as reimbursement for his time collecting the research materials, which Dastgheib cashed.
"There is no evidence of a promise," Gallo said. Dastgheib claims the agreement was struck during a telephone conversation with a Genentech employee who subsequently left the company.
Gallo also argued the materials sent by Dastgheib didn't play a key role in Genentech's decision to proceed with developing the drug. He said other scientists had confirmed the presence of VEGF in cases of wet AMD.
Gallo also said Dastgheib waited too long to bring legal action against Genentech, exceeding the statute of limitations. The jury found that Dastgheib did file his suit within the statute of limitations, but rejected his underlying claims.
Genentech developed Lucentis in a partnership with Novartis AG (NVS) of Switzerland. Genentech, which is majority-owned by Roche Holding AG (RHHBY) of Switzerland, holds commercial rights for Lucentis in the U.S., while Novartis has marketing rights for the rest of the world.
Lucentis racked up third-quarter sales of about $153 million, exceeding expectations for the new drug.
Although Lucentis sales have been brisk, it has been dogged by controversy. Some experts say another Genentech drug, the cancer treatment Avastin, is as effective as Lucentis in treating wet AMD, but much cheaper. The National Institutes of Health said earlier this month it planned to fund a study comparing the two drugs.
No comments:
Post a Comment