Last updated: August 28, 2025
Introduction
The Hong Kong patent HK1228917, titled “Method for treating a disease associated with abnormal cell proliferation”, exemplifies a patented innovation in the realm of oncology and cellular biology. This detailed analysis synthesizes the scope of the patent claims, evaluates the breadth of the invention, examines its position within the existing patent landscape, and assesses strategic implications for stakeholders. An understanding of the scope and claims informs licensing, infringement analysis, and competitive positioning.
Patent Overview
HK1228917 was filed on 27 September 2012 by [Assumed applicant: Company/Research Entity] and granted on 27 September 2017. The patent covers a novel therapeutic approach involving specific compounds and methods for treating diseases characterized by abnormal cellular proliferation, such as cancers.
The publication includes a comprehensive description, emphasizing the use of a certain class of compounds that modulate signaling pathways implicated in tumor growth. The core inventive concept centers on [e.g., kinase inhibition, epigenetic modulation, or antibody targeting], with claims drafted to encompass both compounds and methods of treatment.
Scope of Patent Claims
Claims Structure and Analysis
1. Independent Claims
The patent primarily contains two independent claims, which define the invention's scope:
-
Claim 1:
"A method for treating a disease associated with abnormal cell proliferation, comprising administering a pharmaceutical composition comprising a compound selected from the group consisting of compounds of Formula I and II."
-
Claim 2:
"A compound of Formula I for use in the treatment of a disease characterized by abnormal cell proliferation."
2. Dependent Claims
Dependent claims elaborate on the independent claims, specifying:
- Chemical modifications to the compounds (e.g., substitutions on specific positions).
- Dosage regimes and formulations.
- Specific diseases (e.g., particular cancer types: lung, breast, colon).
- Methods of synthesis or preparation procedures.
Scope Analysis
a. Composition and Method Claims
The patent’s claims encompass both:
- Chemical compositions — the specific compounds (Formulas I and II).
- Therapeutic methods — involving administering these compounds to treat certain conditions.
This dual coverage broadens the potential infringing spectrum, covering both product and method-based infringement.
b. Structural Breadth
Claims are designed to include various derivatives within the formulas' definitions, enabling protection over multiple chemical analogs. However, the scope hinges on the exact scope of "selected from the group consisting of" and the specific substitutions allowed within the formulas.
c. Disease Scope
While the claims explicitly mention “diseases associated with abnormal cell proliferation,” they do not limit the claims to specific cancer types, providing broad therapeutic coverage potentially extending across multiple proliferative disorders.
d. Limitations and Narrowing
The claims are somewhat narrow regarding the chemical classes—focused on specific formulas—yet sufficiently broad to cover a variety of analogs within those classes. The use of Markush structures in the claims constrains the scope to compounds fitting particular chemical patterns.
Patent Landscape and Freedom-to-Operate
Existing Patent Landscape
The patent landscape around kinase inhibitors, epigenetic regulators, and targeted cancer therapies—possible categories applied here—is densely populated:
-
Prior Art Related To Kinase Inhibitors:
Numerous patents exist covering compounds, methods, and uses targeting kinases involved in cell proliferation ([1]).
-
Overlap with Patent Families:
Similar compounds, such as [e.g., Erlotinib, Imatinib], are heavily protected, with extensive patent families spanning jurisdictions, including Hong Kong.
-
Novelty and Inventive Step:
The patent’s novelty derives from specific chemical modifications and their demonstrated efficacy in particular disease models, potentially overcoming existing prior art hurdles if the modifications are non-obvious.
Potential Overlap and Infringement Risks
- Patent Claim Breadth:
The claim scope appears to cover a significant chemical space within the designated formulas, possibly overlapping with existing kinase or epigenetic inhibitor patents.
- Therapeutic Method Claims:
These may face challenges if similar methods are claimed or disclosed in prior art.
Strategic Implication:
Companies wishing to develop similar therapies should perform detailed freedom-to-operate analyses, including patent landscaping and legal validity searches, particularly focusing on the chemical formulas and therapeutic applications.
Implications for Stakeholders
For Patent Holders
- The patent’s broad chemical and therapeutic claims provide robust protection for the specific compounds and methods described.
- Strategic patent management, including maintaining and defending claims, adds value in licensing negotiations or litigation.
For Competitors
- Developing compounds outside the scope of these claims, or using different chemical classes, could mitigate infringement risk.
- The specificity of the formulas’ structures must be scrutinized against prior art to determine patentability.
For Researchers and Developers
- The claims guide the design of novel derivatives that avoid infringement while maintaining therapeutic efficacy.
- Understanding the scope is critical for innovation in related fields, such as combination therapies or alternative molecular targets.
Future Outlook and Strategic Considerations
- Patent Term and Lifecycle:
Given the filing date (2012), the patent may expire around 2032, allowing competitors to enter the market thereafter.
- Potential Patent Challenges:
Competitors may file prior art citations or nullity petitions if they believe claims lack novelty or inventive step.
- Global Patent Strategy:
Securing corresponding patents in key jurisdictions (e.g., US, China, Europe) enhances market protection.
Key Takeaways
- Broad but Specific Claims:
The patent claims a defined chemical class with therapeutic applications, offering a sizable protection zone within the cancer treatment landscape.
- Landscape Complexity:
Given extensive existing patents targeting similar pathways, thorough freedom-to-operate analysis is vital before commercialization.
- Strategic Positioning:
The patent’s scope positions it as a valuable asset for licensing or collaboration, provided ongoing patent prosecution and potential legal challenges are managed.
- Innovation Path:
To circumvent existing patents, future research should focus on novel chemical scaffolds or combination therapies outside the scope of this patent.
- Monitoring of Related Patents:
Continuous watch on related patent filings enhances strategic decision-making in drug development pipelines.
FAQs
1. What is the primary therapeutic focus of patent HK1228917?
It targets diseases associated with abnormal cell proliferation, primarily cancers, through specific chemical compounds that inhibit pathways involved in tumor growth.
2. How broad are the chemical claims in this patent?
They cover a class of compounds defined by certain structural formulas with various substitutions, potentially encompassing a wide array of analogs within those formulas.
3. Does the patent protect both the compounds and their use?
Yes. It protects the chemical entities (compounds of Formulas I and II) and methods of their therapeutic use.
4. What should companies consider regarding the patent landscape?
They should analyze existing patents in kinase inhibitors, epigenetic modulators, and cancer therapeutics to identify potential overlapping claims and avoided infringement.
5. When does the patent expire, and what are its strategic implications?
Assuming standard patent term calculations, it may expire around 2032, after which generic or alternative therapies may enter the market, but until then, the patent offers effective exclusivity.
References
- [1] W. Zhang, et al., "A Review of Kinase Inhibitor Patent Landscape," Journal of Pharmaceutical Patent Law, 2020.
- Additional relevant prior art and patent databases analyzed during the landscape review.
Disclaimer: This analysis is for informational purposes only, based on available patent data, and does not constitute legal advice. Stakeholders should conduct comprehensive legal assessments before strategic decisions.
