The nonprofit Knowledge Ecology International (KEI) is urging federal health officials to override the patents on Xtandi, a prostate cancer drug developed with government support, to allow lower-cost generics into the market early. Their argument: taxpayer-funded science should be widely accessible and affordable.
In response, multiple organizations have pushed back, citing concerns about unintended consequences for the innovation ecosystem. A letter from Conservatives for Property Rights argues that overriding patents undermines incentives for commercialization. More recently, the Bayh-Dole Coalition—a national group focused on protecting the technology transfer system—sent its own letter to the Department of Health and Human Services.
The coalition contends that invoking Bayh-Dole or other federal statutes in this case would go beyond their intended scope, weakening confidence in patent protections, deterring private investment, and disrupting public-private partnerships that help translate university research into real-world products. They also note that Xtandi’s patents are set to expire by 2027, with generics already in development.
Why does it matter?
This debate goes beyond a single drug. It raises fundamental questions about who has the right to control and commercialize discoveries that emerge from taxpayer-funded research, questions that directly impact universities, startups, patients, and the public.
As legal and policy discussions continue, research institutions and innovation partners across the country are watching closely. What happens next could influence how publicly funded research is translated into real-world impact that advances innovation and serves the public good.
This policy conversation touches on drug pricing, public access, and the future of federally funded innovation. Here’s how to stay informed:
