Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market 2020: Potential Growth, Challenges, and Know the Companies List …

… Potentially Benefit or Loose out From the Impact of COVID-19 | Key Players: Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc., ArQule, Inc., Array BioPharma Inc., etc.

A perfect mix of quantitative & qualitative Bile Duct Cancer Drug market information highlighting developments, industry challenges that competitors are facing along with gaps and opportunities available and would trend in Bile Duct Cancer Drug market. The study bridges the historical data from 2014 to 2019 and estimated until 2026.

The Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market report also provides the market impact and new opportunities created due to the COVID19/CORONA Virus Catastrophe The total market is further divided by company, by country, and by application/types for the competitive landscape analysis. The report then estimates 2020-2025 market development trends of Bile Duct Cancer Drug Industry.

Request For Exclusive Free Sample PDF along with few company profiles

The Top players are Ariad Pharmaceuticals, Inc., ArQule, Inc., Array BioPharma Inc., Arrien Pharmaceuticals, LLC, Aslan Pharmaceuticals Pte. Ltd., Bavarian Nordic A/S, Bayer AG, Blueprint Medicines Corporation, Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH, Boston Biomedical, Inc., Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celgene Corporation, CellAct Pharma GmbH, Cellceutix Corporation, Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., Concordia Healthcare Corp..

Market Segmentation:

By Product Type: Cabozantinib S-malate, Elpamotide, Exatecan Mesylate, LY-2801653, NUC-1031, Others

On the basis of the end users/applications, Hospital, Clinic, Others

Downlaod Sample ToC to understand the CORONA Virus/COVID19 impact and be smart in redefining business strategies.


Be the first to knock the door showing the potential that Bile Duct Cancer Drug market is holding in it. Uncover the Gaps and Opportunities to derive the most relevant insights from our research document to gain market size.

A major chunk of this Global Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market research report is talking about some significant approaches for enhancing the performance of the companies. Marketing strategies and different channels have been listed here. Collectively, it gives more focus on changing rules, regulations, and policies of governments. It will help to both established and new startups of the market.

The study objectives of this report are:

To analyze global Bile Duct Cancer Drug status, future forecast, growth opportunity, key market, and key players.

To present the Bile Duct Cancer Drug development in the United States, Europe, and China.

To strategically profile the key players and comprehensively analyze their development plan and strategies.

To define, describe and forecast the market by product type, market, and key regions.

Get Special Discount Up To 50%,

Industrial Analysis of Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market:


Major Points from Table of Contents

1 Bile Duct Cancer Drug Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market Overview

2 Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market Competition by Manufacturers

3 Production Capacity by Region

4 Global Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market by Regions

5 Production, Revenue, Price Trend by Type

6 Global Bile Duct Cancer Drug Market Analysis by Application

7 Company Profiles and Key Figures in Bile Duct Cancer Drug Business

8 Bile Duct Cancer Drug Manufacturing Cost Analysis

9 Marketing Channel, Distributors and Customers

10 Market Dynamics

11 Production and Supply Forecast

12 Consumption and Demand Forecast

13 Forecast by Type and by Application (2021-2026)

14 Research Finding and Conclusion

15 Methodology and Data Source.



Address: 6400 Village Pkwy suite # 104, Dublin, CA 94568, USA

Contact Name: Rohan S.

Email:[email protected]

Phone: +1-909-329-2808

UK: +44 (203) 743 1898


COVID-19 Vaccine Leader Moderna “Not Aware of Any Significant Intellectual Property …

Arbutus Biopharma owns certain patents relating to lipid-nanoparticle “delivery systems” for mRNA molecules. These delivery systems essentially …

Moderna, one of the global leaders in developing a safe and effective vaccine to combat COVID-19, appears poised to get through clinical trials with a vaccine that is based on mRNA technology. As was recently announced, Pfizer demonstrated a 90% effectiveness with its vaccine, which is also based on mRNA technology. If all stays on course, Pfizer and Moderna may be the first two market entrants with vaccines, using the non-traditional mRNA technology.

But in order for at least Moderna’s mRNA technology to function properly, it needs a “delivery system.” Specifically, Moderna’s COVID-19 vaccine introduces “mRNA-1273” molecules into the recipient via a delivery system that protects the mRNA in the bloodstream and allows for entry into cells. Once inside the cells, the mRNA-1273 molecules act like computer code and instruct the cells to produce the characteristic COVID-19 spike proteins. The immune system identifies the spike proteins as antigens and builds its defenses against those antigens in preparation for the potential exposure to the actual COVID-19 virus.

Arbutus Biopharma owns certain patents relating to lipid-nanoparticle “delivery systems” for mRNA molecules. These delivery systems essentially wrap the molecules in balls of fat to both disguise them, thereby preventing attack by the immune system, and to allow the target cells to readily ingest the mRNA molecules. Moderna lost its sublicense to those disputed patents in 2016 and then (before the pandemic) sought to invalidate the patents through three USPTO inter partes review (IPR) proceedings that were decided earlier this year.

This post examines the procedural history and status of those proceedings.

On July 23, 2020, the Patent Trial and Appeal Board (“PTAB”) for the United States Patent and Trademark Office issued a final written decision upholding the claims of Arbutus Biopharma Corporation’s U.S. Patent No. 8,058,069 (“the ’069 patent”) from a challenge by Petitioner Moderna Therapeutics, Inc.[1]

The PTAB specifically determined that Moderna failed to show, by a preponderance of the evidence, that claims 1-22 of the ’069 patent were unpatentable under 35 U.S.C. § 103. The ’069 patent’s claims relate to “stable nucleic acid-lipid particles (SNALP) comprising a nucleic acid (such as one or more interfering RNA), methods of making the SNALP, and methods of delivering and/or administering the SNALP.”[2]

Moderna sought to invalidate the ’069 patent on two grounds, each of which the PTAB rejected. On the first ground, Moderna argued claims 1-22 were anticipated or obvious by International Application Publication No. 2005/007196 (“the ’196 PCT”) and United States Application Publication No. 2006/0134189 (“the ’189 Publication”). On the second ground, Moderna contended claims 1-22 were anticipated or obvious by Arbutus’s prior disclosures in light of two pieces of non-patent literature.[3][4]

This is the third final written decision in a series of IPRs brought by Moderna against Arbutus patents, and it is also the first final written decision with an entirely negative result for Moderna. Moderna’s first IPR ended in success, with the PTAB invalidating Arbutus’s US Patent No. 9,404,127 (“the ’127 patent”)[5]; but Moderna’s second IPR, concluded with mixed results, with the PTAB invalidating some claims of Arbutus’s US Patent No. 9,364,435 (“the ’435 patent”) and upholding others.[6]

Importantly, Arbutus’s ’127, ’435, and ’069 patents are similar to the extent they claim stable nucleic acid-lipid particles (SNALP) and methods of delivery. These patents appear to cover liquid nanoparticle (LNP) technology, which can be used to deliver messenger ribonucleic acid (mRNA) to cells. In the past, Moderna has indirectly licensed such LNP technology from Arbutus, but it has recently begun to develop its own proprietary LNP technology.

After the PTAB’s ruling on the ’069 patent, Moderna stated it “is not aware of any significant intellectual property impediments” toward products it intends to commercialize, including mRNA-1273. Indeed, whether Moderna is infringing Arbutus’s patents during its development of a COVID-19 vaccine is unknown, but it is worth noting that Arbutus has not brought any patent infringement actions against Moderna.

The IPRs for the ’127, ’435, and ’069 patents have each been appealed to the Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit (CAFC), and Moderna’s appeal brief for the case involving the ’069 patent is due this month. In an event that could be viewed as related to its failed challenge to the ’069 patent, Moderna stated last month it will not enforce its COVID-19 related patents against “those making vaccines intended to combat the pandemic” while the pandemic continues.[7] However, it remains to be seen whether another company could – or would – enforce its COVID-19 related patents against Moderna during this pandemic or otherwise.

[1]Moderna Therapeutics, Inc. v. Arbutus Biopharma Corp., No. IPR2019-00554, 2020 WL 4237232 (P.T.A.B. July 23, 2020).


[3] Lin et al., Three-Dimensional Imaging of Lipid Gene-Carriers: Membrane Charge Density Controls Universal Transfection Behavior in Lamellar Cationic Liposome-DNA Complexes, 84 BIOPHYSICAL J. 3307–16 (2003) (“Lin”).

[4] Ahmad et al., New Multivalent Cationic Lipids Reveal Bell Curve for Transfection Efficiency Versus Membrane Charge Density: Lipid-DNA Complexes for Gene Delivery, 7 J. GENE MED. 739–48 (2005) (“Ahmad”). Ex. 1007.

[5]Moderna Therapeutics, Inc. v. Protiva Biotherapeutics, Inc., No. IPR2018-00680, 2018 WL 4362415 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 12, 2018). [Note: Protiva was a wholly-owned subsidiary of Arbutus.]

[6]Moderna Therapeutics, Inc. v. Protiva Biotherapeutics, Inc., IPR2018-00739 (P.T.A.B. Sept. 11, 2019).


MMJ Group updates on industry trends as federal legalisation of cannabis in the US now a …

The following is an update from Embark Ventures, the asset manager of MMJ’s cannabis investment portfolio: Election news from the United States …

MMJ Group Holdings Ltd’s (ASX:MMJ) (OTCMKTS:MMJJF) net asset value (NAV) has outshined the benchmark Alternative Harvest ETF during the four months ended October 31 2020.

MMJ NAV generated a negative return of 14% which compared to a negative 17% for the benchmark return for the same period.

It is a different story for the cannabis industry following the US elections with a potential Joe Biden win causing a major rally in cannabis stocks.

Most US states have passed some form of medical or recreational cannabis legalisation and MMJ believes federal legalisation of cannabis is now a question of when and not if.

The following is an update from Embark Ventures, the asset manager of MMJ’s cannabis investment portfolio:

Election news from the United States appears very promising with Joe Biden poised to win the presidency.

This has caused a major rally in cannabis stocks. As of this writing, many of the major bellwether stocks have been up almost 50% or more in some cases over the past several days.

Further good news came in the form of voters in individual states choosing cannabis legalisation via ballot proposition measures including New Jersey, Arizona, South Dakota, Montana and Mississippi.

Oregon even chose the dramatic step of voting to have all recreational drugs be decriminalized.

These additional US states represent several billion dollars in potential tax revenue that can be collected by state governments in these COVID-hit hard times.

These five states alone could add $2.5bln a year in annual top line sales for the industry.

New Jersey in particular is fascinating due to its proximity to New York state – if cannabis legalisation is a success there then we imagine New York state can’t be too far behind.

They would be highly incented to collect those tax dollars directly instead of having their residents line the tax coffers of a neighbouring state.

Factoring in these latest changes and looking top down, we can see that a majority of US states have passed some form of medical or recreational cannabis legalisation.

Some of these states have been historically quite conservative in their attitude towards cannabis so the cultural change is quite real.

In our view, it’s a fait accompli that we will see federal legalisation in the US. It’s now a question of when and not if.

Coffee Memorial Blood Center Asking for Covid-19 Recovered Patients to Donate Plasma

Coffee Memorial needs anyone who has recovered from COVID-19 to register to donate convalescent plasma and to donate as often as possible.

AMARILLO, Texas (KAMR/KCIT) –If you’ve been diagnosed with Covid-19 and recovered, Coffee Memorial needs your help to help others.

  • Coffee Memorial needs anyone who has recovered from COVID-19 to register to donate convalescent plasma and to donate as often as possible.
  • To donate convalescent plasma, donors must meet the criteria below:
  • Prior diagnosis of COVID-19, documented by a laboratory test
  • Symptom-free for 14 days prior to donation
  • Be at least 7 days past their last blood or plasma donation
  • Those who have a positive test result and think they may be eligible to give convalescent plasma should call the convalescent plasma hotline at 888-308-3924.

For more information on donating at Coffee Memorial click here.