AAV Capsid Engineering Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- Filing has flattened, not accelerated. activity peaked at 38 filings in 2020 and sat at 34 by the 2022 midpoint, with no renewed climb since.
- The top five assignees already hold 38.2% of the field. 318 of 832 records in scope sit with just five organisations, and the leader alone accounts for 81 records.
- Directed evolution and library screening dominate the claim space. C12N appears on 78.1% of records and C40B combinatorial-library claims on 12.7%, showing where the crowding actually sits.
Filing growth compares 2021 (37 records) with 2024 (14) — a three-year span. 2024 is the most recent year we treat as complete: publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 onwards are still filling in and any growth rate that ends there would understate the field. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 832 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
AAV capsid engineering for tropism and immunity spans work on altering how adeno-associated virus vectors target tissue and evade pre-existing neutralizing antibodies, alongside the packaging and manufacturability constraints that determine whether an engineered capsid can be produced at scale. The 832 records in scope were pulled from filings and publications dated 2015 through mid-2026, using search terms centred on capsid variant libraries and directed evolution cross-referenced against tissue tropism, immune evasion and packaging efficiency in the claims and description text.
Because publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2026 count of 2 records understates real filing activity for that year; the more reliable signal is the run of full years through 2024-2025.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 832-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 16 in 2017 to a peak of 38 in 2020, then eased to 34 by the 2022 midpoint — a flat-to-declining pattern rather than sustained growth, before the expected under-count in the most recent partial year.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) touches 78.1% of the 832 records, far ahead of C07K peptide/protein claims at 32.6% and C12Q enzyme/DNA measurement claims at 28.1%. Combinatorial library claims under C40B and bioinformatics under G16B sit at 12.7% and 11.4% respectively — smaller footprints, but the ones worth watching for where claim language is still forming.
Shares are the percentage of the 832 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on AAV Capsid Engineering for Tropism and Immunity with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about aav capsid engineering for tropism and immunity and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA recent filing worth reading in full
A translation-independent directed evolution strategy to engineer aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases
A translation-independent method of using directed evolution to engineer aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases (aaRSs) that directly select for tRNA acylation without ribosomal translation (START) is described. The efficacy of START was demonstrated by identifying novel mutants of the M. alvus pyrrolysyl-tRNA synthetase from a naive library that charge noncanonical amino acids.Filed by Trustees of Boston College, this application extends directed-evolution methodology outside the capsid itself into synthetase engineering — a sign the underlying selection technique is migrating to adjacent claim territory.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US5223409A | Directed evolution of novel binding proteins | 14,045 |
| 2 | US5571698A | Directed evolution of novel binding proteins | 5,478 |
| 3 | US5837500A | Directed evolution of novel binding proteins | 946 |
| 4 | US6171820B1 | Saturation mutagenesis in directed evolution | 681 |
| 5 | US6361974B1 | Exonuclease-mediated nucleic acid reassembly in directed evolution | 605 |
| 6 | US5830696A | Directed evolution of thermophilic enzymes | 544 |
| 7 | US6537776B1 | Synthetic ligation reassembly in directed evolution | 510 |
| 8 | US6238884B1 | End selection in directed evolution | 384 |
| 9 | US6605449B1 | Synthetic ligation reassembly in directed evolution | 318 |
| 10 | US6773900B2 | End selection in directed evolution | 308 |
Citation counts favour older, foundational filings within this searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on the field's directed-evolution methods, not as a ranking of current commercial relevance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Eureka on the web
When you want the answer in the next five minutes.
The agent works the prompt against patents and technical literature, citing every source.
Run your analysis now →MCP server & REST API
When it has to run inside your own pipeline.
Patent search, landscape analysis and assignee resolution as MCP tools. Drop them into any agent framework, or call REST directly.
Browse MCP servers →What the data actually indicates
Three read-throughs from the filing trend, the citation table and the technology split that matter for a filing decision.
Growth has stalled, not accelerated
The field peaked in 2020 and had already eased back by 2022, well before the expected under-count of the most recent partial year. This is a mature filing pattern, not an emerging rush — new entrants are competing for space that has already been substantially claimed rather than for genuinely open territory.
Foundational directed-evolution patents still anchor the field
The most-cited records in this corpus are early directed-evolution and binding-protein patents rather than AAV-specific capsid filings, which means the methodological backbone of capsid engineering traces to general protein-evolution IP predating the tropism-specific applications built on top of it.
Genetic-engineering claims are the densest layer
With C12N present on more than three-quarters of records, most capsid engineering claims are anchored in core genetic-engineering language. The narrower C40B combinatorial-library share, at 12.7%, marks a smaller but distinct claim layer around library construction methods themselves.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to aav capsid engineering for tropism and immunity, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space, and who has stalled
The ranking covers 100 companies counted in records, not a top-50 or top-100 cut of a larger field — this is the entire ranked list the dataset returns.
One organisation sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 81 of the 832 records in scope, roughly 25% more than the fifth-place holder at 48. That gap, combined with a top-five share of 38.2%, points to a field where a handful of research-university and biotech programmes built early and broad portfolios.
Filing power sits with a narrow group
Ten organisations account for 465 of the 832 records in scope. For a new entrant, this means most obvious capsid-engineering claim territory already has an incumbent; freedom-to-operate work should start with these ten portfolios before anywhere else.
Even leaders have gone quiet in the latest year
Several of the most active historical filers show zero filings in the latest year with year-over-year drops of -100%, consistent with the field's overall flat-to-declining trend rather than any single company's retreat. Given publication lag, some of this is timing, but the multi-year plateau predates the most recent gap.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| President and Fellows of Harvard College | 0 | -100% |
| The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois | 0 | -100% |
| Diversa Corp | 0 | — |
| Codexis Inc | 0 | — |
| California Institute of Technology | 0 | — |
| Kapa Biosystems Inc | 0 | — |
| The Broad Institute Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next questions depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or scouting for white space.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the top 10
With 55.9% of the 832 records held by ten organisations, any new filing in tropism or immune-evasion capsid engineering should be checked against those ten portfolios first, not the full ranked list.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaMap the under-claimed sub-areas before drafting claims
Packaging efficiency, translation-independent selection, and combinatorial library construction methods show thinner claim density than the core C12N layer — worth a targeted search before committing claim language.
Search white space in EurekaTrack the flat filing trend against publication lag
The 2026 count is understated by roughly 18 months of publication lag; re-check the 2024-2025 trend in six months before concluding the field has genuinely plateaued.
Set a filing-trend alert in EurekaQuestions practitioners ask about this space
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 81 of the 832 records in scope, notably ahead of the fifth-place holder at 48. The top five organisations combined account for 38.2% of all records, and the top ten account for 55.9%. That concentration means a small group of research universities and biotech firms built the earliest and broadest portfolios, and most new filings now compete against their existing claims rather than filing into open space.
No, filing activity peaked at 38 records in 2020 and had already eased to 34 by the 2022 midpoint, a flat-to-declining pattern rather than continued growth. The most recent year shows only 2 records, but that figure is understated because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. Taken together, the trend suggests a maturing field rather than one still in a filing rush.
C12N, covering microorganisms and genetic engineering, appears on 78.1% of the 832 records in scope, making it by far the densest claim layer. C07K peptide and protein claims follow at 32.6%, and C12Q enzyme and DNA measurement claims at 28.1%. Smaller but distinct layers include C40B combinatorial library claims at 12.7% and G16B bioinformatics claims at 11.4%, which is where claim language still looks less settled.
WO2025128649A1, filed by Trustees of Boston College and published 2025-06-19, describes a translation-independent directed evolution method for engineering aminoacyl-tRNA synthetases that selects directly for tRNA acylation without ribosomal translation. It demonstrates the approach on a pyrrolysyl-tRNA synthetase mutant library selected for charging noncanonical amino acids. For capsid engineers, it matters because it extends directed-evolution selection methodology into synthetase engineering, a claim area adjacent to but distinct from capsid variant library work.
Based on the IPC composition, packaging efficiency and manufacturability claims, translation-independent selection assays, and combinatorial library construction methods show thinner claim density than the core genetic-engineering layer that covers 78.1% of records. These branches sit at the edges of the dominant C12N and C40B classes rather than at their centre, which is where a first claim drafted around a specific selection or assembly method is less likely to run into a dense prior-art wall. Any white-space claim should still be checked against the ten leading assignees, who together hold 55.9% of all records.
Research AAV Capsid Engineering for Tropism and Immunity in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole aav capsid engineering for tropism and immunity corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Disclaimer. This page is generated from Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent and scientific-literature records, and is provided for general information and reference only.
Patent data carries inherent limitations: recent filings (typically the most recent 18–24 months) are under-counted due to standard publication lag; counts may be reported at either a patent-family or a patent-record basis and are not always directly comparable; classification, applicant-name, and citation data may contain errors, duplicates, or omissions; and the underlying search query defines and constrains the scope shown. As a result, the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing on this page constitutes an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate, or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently and reviewed with qualified patent, legal, and domain professionals. Patsnap makes no warranties, express or implied, as to the accuracy, completeness, or fitness for any particular purpose of the information presented.
Machine translation. Assignee and organisation names originally recorded in Chinese, Japanese or Korean have been rendered into English by an AI translation step so that the tables stay readable. These renderings are best-effort and may not match a company’s registered English name; the original name is what the underlying patent record carries, and it is what any Eureka query launched from this page uses.