Search

Xiao Wei,1,* Yun Zhao,1,* Wenyue Yan,2 Qigang Dai,3 Hui Wu,1 Yang Miao,1 Lei Huang,1 Qing Liu,4 Xuyao Zhang,5 Hongxia Wang,1 Yanan Liu,1 Linlin Zhang1 1Department of Pharmacy, The First People’s Hospital of Yancheng, Yancheng No.1 People’s Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Yancheng, Jiangsu, 224000, People’s Republic of China; 2Department of Oncology, The First People’s Hospital of Yancheng, Yancheng No.1 People’s Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Yancheng, Jiangsu, 224000, People’s Republic of China; 3Department of Acute Infectious Disease Control and Prevention, Jiangsu Provincial Center for Disease Control and Prevention, Nanjing, Jiangsu, 210009, People’s Republic of China; 4Department of Pharmacy, Yancheng Maternity and Child Health Care Hospital, Yancheng, Jiangsu, 224000, People’s Republic of China; 5Department of Biological Medicines & Shanghai Engineering Research Center of Immunotherapeutics, School of Pharmacy, Fudan University, Shanghai, 201203, People’s Republic of China*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: Linlin Zhang; Yanan Liu, Department of Pharmacy, The First People’s Hospital of Yancheng, Yancheng No.1 People’s Hospital, Affiliated Hospital of Medical School, Nanjing University, Yancheng, Jiangsu, 224000, People’s Republic of China, Email 1515605617@qq.com; lynishot@163.comBackground: Anlotinib and apatinib, both vascular endothelial growth factor receptor-tyrosine kinase inhibitors (VEGFR-TKIs), are clinically established in the treatment of advanced non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) in China, with anlotinib emerging as a standard treatment strategy. This study was conducted to evaluate the efficacy and safety of apatinib and anlotinib, and to compare their differences in treating patients with advanced NSCLC.Patients and Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients with advanced NSCLC t

Setting an industry-wide standard is crucial for the interoperability, compatibility, and efficiency of information and communication technologies. To minimize holdup problems, patent holders are often required to ex-ante commit to licensing their technologies under Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Yet, there is little consensus, in both courtrooms and industries, on the exact meaning of FRAND. We propose a new framework that enables a precise distinction: fairness in the distribution of royalty payments among patent users, and reasonableness in setting the size of the compensation to the patent holder, where both the size and the distribution of payments are determined in a non-discriminatory way that ensures similar firms are treated similarly.

Setting an industry-wide standard is crucial for the interoperability, compatibility, and efficiency of information and communication technologies. To minimize holdup problems, patent holders are often required to ex-ante commit to licensing their technologies under Fair, Reasonable, and Non-Discriminatory (FRAND) terms. Yet, there is little consensus, in both courtrooms and industries, on the exact meaning of FRAND. We propose a new framework that enables a precise distinction: fairness in the distribution of royalty payments among patent users, and reasonableness in setting the size of the compensation to the patent holder, where both the size and the distribution of payments are determined in a non-discriminatory way that ensures similar firms are treated similarly.