IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/eee/tefoso/v139y2019icp185-199.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Forecasting of emerging therapeutic monoclonal antibodies patents based on a decision model

Author

Listed:
  • Pereira, Cristiano Gonçalves
  • Lavoie, Joao Ricardo
  • Garces, Edwin
  • Basso, Fernanda
  • Dabić, Marina
  • Porto, Geciane Silveira
  • Daim, Tugrul

Abstract

Therapeutic monoclonal antibodies (mAbs) market is strongly contributing to the rising growth of the biotechnology industry. Despite the increasing number of inventions over time, a few therapeutic mAbs are currently marketed. This paper focuses on developing an emerging score to select/rank promising therapeutic mAbs patents, based on a hierarchical decision model using expert's opinion. Six attributes related to each factor concerning patent status, patent owner's profile and mAbs medical relevance were analyzed. The desirability levels of each attribute were also assessed. Our data shows the medical relevance factor as the most important, contributing 50% of the emerging score. Among the attributes, the most important under patent status was proper geographic coverage and wider patent scope; for organization's profile was the preexistence of approved drugs; and for medical relevance, the clinical phase performance. A group of 1053 patents related to therapeutic mAb were scored, and the most promising were concerning combination therapy using immune checkpoint inhibitors. The study has managerial implications related to patent portfolio management and patent valuation, and provides instructions to rank mAbs patents according to the emerging score defined by attribute's importance in order to improve the identification of future innovations pathways.

Suggested Citation

  • Pereira, Cristiano Gonçalves & Lavoie, Joao Ricardo & Garces, Edwin & Basso, Fernanda & Dabić, Marina & Porto, Geciane Silveira & Daim, Tugrul, 2019. "Forecasting of emerging therapeutic monoclonal antibodies patents based on a decision model," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 139(C), pages 185-199.
    • Handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:139:y:2019:i:c:p:185-199
    DOI: 10.1016/j.techfore.2018.11.002
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0040162518307741
    Download Restriction: Full text for ScienceDirect subscribers only
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1016/j.techfore.2018.11.002?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Lanjouw, Jean O & Schankerman, Mark, 2001. "Characteristics of Patent Litigation: A Window on Competition," RAND Journal of Economics, The RAND Corporation, vol. 32(1), pages 129-151, Spring.
    2. Meyer, Martin, 2006. "Are patenting scientists the better scholars?: An exploratory comparison of inventor-authors with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 35(10), pages 1646-1662, December.
    3. Carlos J. Serrano, 2010. "The dynamics of the transfer and renewal of patents," RAND Journal of Economics, RAND Corporation, vol. 41(4), pages 686-708, December.
    4. Guellec, Dominique & Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, Bruno v., 2000. "Applications, grants and the value of patent," Economics Letters, Elsevier, vol. 69(1), pages 109-114, October.
    5. Martin Meyer, 2006. "Knowledge integrators or weak links? An exploratory comparison of patenting researchers with their non-inventing peers in nano-science and technology," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 68(3), pages 545-560, September.
    6. Julie Callaert & Bart Van Looy & Arnold Verbeek & Koenraad Debackere & Bart Thijs, 2006. "Traces of Prior Art: An analysis of non-patent references found in patent documents," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 69(1), pages 3-20, October.
    7. Yong-Gil Lee & Jeong-Dong Lee & Yong-Il Song & Se-Jun Lee, 2007. "An in-depth empirical analysis of patent citation counts using zero-inflated count data model: The case of KIST," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 70(1), pages 27-39, January.
    8. Kim, Gabjo & Bae, Jinwoo, 2017. "A novel approach to forecast promising technology through patent analysis," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 117(C), pages 228-237.
    9. Narin, Francis & Noma, Elliot & Perry, Ross, 1987. "Patents as indicators of corporate technological strength," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 16(2-4), pages 143-155, August.
    10. Andrea Fernández‐Ribas, 2010. "International Patent Strategies of Small and Large Firms: An Empirical Study of Nanotechnology," Review of Policy Research, Policy Studies Organization, vol. 27(4), pages 457-473, July.
    11. Morgan, Steve & Grootendorst, Paul & Lexchin, Joel & Cunningham, Colleen & Greyson, Devon, 2011. "The cost of drug development: A systematic review," Health Policy, Elsevier, vol. 100(1), pages 4-17, April.
    12. Gans, Joshua S. & Stern, Scott, 2003. "The product market and the market for "ideas": commercialization strategies for technology entrepreneurs," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 32(2), pages 333-350, February.
    13. Ming-Lang Wang & H. F. Lin & K. W. Wang, 2013. "The Application of AHP in Biotechnology Industry with ERP KSF Implementation," Springer Books, in: Ershi Qi & Jiang Shen & Runliang Dou (ed.), The 19th International Conference on Industrial Engineering and Engineering Management, edition 127, chapter 0, pages 565-574, Springer.
    14. Carpenter, Mark P. & Narin, Francis & Woolf, Patricia, 1981. "Citation rates to technologically important patents," World Patent Information, Elsevier, vol. 3(4), pages 160-163, October.
    15. Reitzig, Markus, 2004. "Improving patent valuations for management purposes--validating new indicators by analyzing application rationales," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 33(6-7), pages 939-957, September.
    16. Jeong, Yujin & Park, Inchae & Yoon, Byungun, 2016. "Forecasting technology substitution based on hazard function," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 104(C), pages 259-272.
    17. Wynne, B., 1975. "The rhetoric of consensus politics: a critical review of technology assessment," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 4(2), pages 108-158, May.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Song, Kisik & Yun, Siyeong & Kim, Leehee & Lee, Sungjoo, 2022. "Investigating new design concepts based on customer value and patent data: The case of a future mobility door," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 184(C).
    2. de Paulo, Alex Fabianne & Nunes, Breno & Porto, Geciane, 2020. "Emerging green technologies for vehicle propulsion systems," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 159(C).
    3. Sharma, Mahak & Sehrawat, Rajat & Daim, Tugrul & Shaygan, Amir, 2021. "Technology assessment: Enabling Blockchain in hospitality and tourism sectors," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 169(C).
    4. Tiberius, Victor & Gojowy, Robin & Dabić, Marina, 2022. "Forecasting the future of robo advisory: A three-stage Delphi study on economic, technological, and societal implications," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 182(C).
    5. Wang, Xiaoli & Daim, Tugrul & Huang, Lucheng & Li, Zhiqiang & Shaikh, Ruqia & Kassi, Diby Francois, 2022. "Monitoring the development trend and competition status of high technologies using patent analysis and bibliographic coupling: The case of electronic design automation technology," Technology in Society, Elsevier, vol. 71(C).
    6. Gurău, Călin & Dana, Leo-Paul, 2020. "Financing paths, firms’ governance and corporate entrepreneurship: Accessing and applying operant and operand resources in biotechnology firms," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 153(C).

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Lee, Changyong & Kwon, Ohjin & Kim, Myeongjung & Kwon, Daeil, 2018. "Early identification of emerging technologies: A machine learning approach using multiple patent indicators," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 127(C), pages 291-303.
    2. Yuan Zhou & Fang Dong & Yufei Liu & Liang Ran, 2021. "A deep learning framework to early identify emerging technologies in large-scale outlier patents: an empirical study of CNC machine tool," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 126(2), pages 969-994, February.
    3. Fischer, Timo & Henkel, Joachim, 2012. "Patent trolls on markets for technology – An empirical analysis of NPEs’ patent acquisitions," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 41(9), pages 1519-1533.
    4. Nicolas van Zeebroeck & Bruno van Pottelsberghe de la Potterie, 2011. "Filing strategies and patent value," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(6), pages 539-561, February.
    5. Kim, Juram & Lee, Gyumin & Lee, Seungbin & Lee, Changyong, 2022. "Towards expert–machine collaborations for technology valuation: An interpretable machine learning approach," Technological Forecasting and Social Change, Elsevier, vol. 183(C).
    6. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2007. "Patents only live twice: a patent survival analysis in Europe," Working Papers CEB 07-028.RS, ULB -- Universite Libre de Bruxelles.
    7. Nicolas van Zeebroeck, 2011. "The puzzle of patent value indicators," Economics of Innovation and New Technology, Taylor & Francis Journals, vol. 20(1), pages 33-62.
    8. Adam B. Jaffe & Gaétan de Rassenfosse, 2017. "Patent citation data in social science research: Overview and best practices," Journal of the Association for Information Science & Technology, Association for Information Science & Technology, vol. 68(6), pages 1360-1374, June.
    9. Christian Sternitzke, 2009. "The international preliminary examination of patent applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty — a proxy for patent value?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 78(2), pages 189-202, February.
    10. Antoine Dechezleprêtre & Yann Ménière & Myra Mohnen, 2017. "International patent families: from application strategies to statistical indicators," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 111(2), pages 793-828, May.
    11. Nils Omland, 2011. "Valuing Patents through Indicators," Chapters, in: Federico Munari & Raffaele Oriani (ed.), The Economic Valuation of Patents, chapter 7, Edward Elgar Publishing.
    12. Yu-Shan Chen & Ke-Chiun Chang, 2009. "Using neural network to analyze the influence of the patent performance upon the market value of the US pharmaceutical companies," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 80(3), pages 637-655, September.
    13. Eun Han & So Sohn, 2015. "Patent valuation based on text mining and survival analysis," The Journal of Technology Transfer, Springer, vol. 40(5), pages 821-839, October.
    14. Jungpyo Lee & So Young Sohn, 2017. "What makes the first forward citation of a patent occur earlier?," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 113(1), pages 279-298, October.
    15. Martin Kalthaus, 2020. "Knowledge recombination along the technology life cycle," Journal of Evolutionary Economics, Springer, vol. 30(3), pages 643-704, July.
    16. Higham, Kyle & de Rassenfosse, Gaétan & Jaffe, Adam B., 2021. "Patent Quality: Towards a Systematic Framework for Analysis and Measurement," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 50(4).
    17. Yong-Gil Lee, 2008. "Patent licensability and life: A study of U.S. patents registered by South Korean public research institutes," Scientometrics, Springer;Akadémiai Kiadó, vol. 75(3), pages 463-471, June.
    18. Burke, Paul F. & Reitzig, Markus, 2007. "Measuring patent assessment quality--Analyzing the degree and kind of (in)consistency in patent offices' decision making," Research Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(9), pages 1404-1430, November.
    19. Kim, Juram & Hong, Suckwon & Kang, Yubin & Lee, Changyong, 2023. "Domain-specific valuation of university technologies using bibliometrics, Jonckheere–Terpstra tests, and data envelopment analysis," Technovation, Elsevier, vol. 122(C).
    20. Jang, Hyun Jin & Woo, Han-Gyun & Lee, Changyong, 2017. "Hawkes process-based technology impact analysis," Journal of Informetrics, Elsevier, vol. 11(2), pages 511-529.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:eee:tefoso:v:139:y:2019:i:c:p:185-199. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Catherine Liu (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/journal/00401625 .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.