Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/allogeneic-cell-therapy-manufacturing-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Cell & Gene TherapyAllogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing Patents
- 87.8% of the 74 records in scope sit with just five assignees — this is a field with a defined leadership group, not a fragmented one.
- Filings peaked in 2022 at 29 and fell to 6 by 2024, a -68% swing that predates the usual 18-month publication lag.
- A61K and C12N classes cover 90.5% and 67.6% of records respectively, showing claim density concentrated in formulation and genetic engineering, not in analytics or QC.
74
Published Records
88%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-68%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (19 records) with 2024 (6) — 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 74 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
Allogeneic cell therapy manufacturing sits at the intersection of donor-independent cell sourcing, gene editing for immune evasion, and the process controls needed to make a batch, rather than a patient-specific lot, into a repeatable product. The search scope here combines allogeneic and off-the-shelf cell terminology in the title with manufacturing-specific concepts — donor selection, gene editing, batch size, cost of goods, potency consistency and master cell bank — in the title or claims, isolating filings that address production and consistency rather than therapeutic use alone.
The dataset spans 2015 through the 2026 cut-off and returns 74 published records, each treated as a distinct patent family in the assignee ranking. That is a small, tightly bounded field: concentration figures and technology shares below should be read against that denominator, not against the wider cell-therapy literature.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 74 records: how filing activity moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim weight.
A sharp rise and an equally sharp pullback
Filings were negligible before 2018, built through the early 2020s, and peaked at 29 in 2022. From 2021's 19 filings to 2024's 6, the count fell 68% over three years. 2024 is the most recent year that can be read as complete; 2025 and 2026 are still filling in under the typical 18-month publication lag, so the apparent drop-off in those years should not be read as the technology cooling further.
Claims cluster in formulation and genetic engineering
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears in 90.5% of the 74 records and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) in 67.6%, with A61P (therapeutic activity) at 70.3% and C07K (peptides and proteins) at 47.3%. G01N (material analysis and testing) appears in just 1.4% of records — a sign that potency-assay and analytical-QC claims are rarely the subject of a filing on their own, even though the search terms explicitly include potency consistency.
Shares are the percentage of the 74 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about allogeneic cell therapy manufacturing and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Representative and most-cited filings
Representative filing
Genetically modified cells for allogeneic cell therapy (US20240358761A1)
SANA BIOTECHNOLOGY, INC.
Provided are engineered cells containing one or more modifications, such as genetic modifications, for use in allogeneic cell therapy. In some embodiments, the engineered cells are hypoimmunogenic cells.Filed by Sana Biotechnology; published 2024-10-31.
Most-cited records in this landscape
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | EP3699268A1 | Universal car-t cell, preparation method therefor and application thereof | 15 |
| 2 | WO2023019227A1 | Genetically modified cells for allogeneic cell therapy to reduce complement-mediated inflammatory reactions | 8 |
| 3 | WO2020222176A1 | Allogeneic cell therapy of b cell malignancies using genetically engineered t cells targeting CD19 | 7 |
| 4 | WO2023019225A2 | Genetically modified cells for allogeneic cell therapy to reduce instant blood mediated inflammatory reactions | 5 |
| 5 | US20220023344A1 | Allogeneic cell therapy of acute lymphoblastic leukemia using genetically engineered t cells targeting CD19 | 5 |
| 6 | WO2023019229A1 | Genetically modified primary cells for allogeneic cell therapy | 3 |
| 7 | WO2023019226A1 | Genetically modified cells for allogeneic cell therapy | 3 |
| 8 | US20230027004A1 | Closed-system and method for autologous and allogeneic cell therapy manufacturing | 3 |
| 9 | WO2022084862A1 | Allogeneic cell therapy of b cell malignancies using genetically engineered t cells targeting CD19 | 3 |
| 10 | US20220118019A1 | Allogeneic cell therapy of b cell malignancies using genetically engineered t cells targeting CD19 | 3 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence on later filers, not of current commercial weight.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, trend and IPC composition are read together.
Concentration
87.8% of 74 records
held by the top 5 assignees
Leadership is defined, not fragmented
With the top five assignees holding 87.8% of the 74 records in scope and the leader alone at 26, this is not a landscape where a new entrant can expect to find open ground by simply filing more broadly. Freedom-to-operate work should start with the ranked leaders' claim sets, not with a general prior-art sweep.
Based on the assignee ranking of 10 companies.
Momentum
-68% (2021→2024)
filing decline, three-year span
The rush has passed its peak
Filing volume rose sharply into a 2022 peak of 29, then fell to 6 by 2024 — a -68% move over that span. Recent-year momentum data shows several leading assignees at zero filings in the latest year, consistent with a field consolidating around already-filed positions rather than one still being staked out.
2025-2026 figures are still incomplete under normal publication lag.
Technology mix
1.4% vs 90.5%
G01N share vs A61K share
Analytics and QC are thinly claimed
Despite potency consistency and cost of goods being explicit search terms, G01N (material analysis and testing) appears in only 1.4% of the 74 records, against 90.5% for A61K. Claim activity is overwhelmingly about the cell product and its genetic modification, not about the assays and process-analytics used to release a batch.
IPC shares sum above 100% because records carry multiple classes.
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to allogeneic cell therapy manufacturing, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who holds the claim positions
The ranking returns 10 companies covering all 74 records in scope, with the top 5 alone accounting for 87.8% of them. That leaves a short tail: fifth place holds 4 records and tenth place holds 1, so the field runs from a clear leader down to single-filing entrants rather than a smooth gradient.
Leader
26 records
top-ranked assignee
One assignee sets the pace
The top-ranked assignee holds 26 of the 74 records in scope, well ahead of fifth place at 4. That gap suggests a first-mover advantage built early in the 2018-2022 filing surge, since recent-year momentum for several leading names shows zero filings in the latest year.
Ranking covers 10 companies total.
Long tail
1 record
tenth-ranked assignee
Single-filing entrants close out the ranking
The tenth-ranked assignee holds just 1 record, and the ranking stops at 10 companies covering 100% of the 74 records — there is no unranked tail beyond what the data endpoint returns. New entrants are more likely to arrive as single-filing academic or clinical-stage players than as diversified portfolio holders.
Top 10 combined equal 100.0% of records in scope.
Cited foundation
15 citations
most-cited record
Universal CAR-T claims anchor later filings
The most-cited record in this set, on universal CAR-T cell preparation, draws 15 citations within the corpus — well above the next tier. Filings on reducing complement-mediated and instant blood-mediated inflammatory reactions in engineered cells also draw multiple citations, marking immune-compatibility engineering as a recurring reference point.
Citation counts favour older filings within this searched corpus.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Sana Biotechnology, Inc. | 0 | — |
| CRISPR Therapeutics AG | 0 | — |
| Juno Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Ningbo Maoxing Biomedical Technology Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Synthorx, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Kite Pharma, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Chongqing Precision Biotech Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| Garuda Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or identifying open claim space.
Run a freedom-to-operate check against the top five
Since 87.8% of the 74 records in scope sit with five assignees, an FTO review should map their specific claim language before broader prior-art searching begins.
Explore assignee claims in EurekaTest claim drafts against thin-coverage branches
Potency-assay and cost-of-goods process claims remain lightly filed relative to cell-engineering classes, and that gap is where a first claim is more likely to clear examination cleanly.
Draft and stress-test claims in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on this landscape
The ranking returns 10 companies covering all 74 records in this landscape, with the leader holding 26 records and the top five together accounting for 87.8% of all records in scope. That is a concentrated field: a small group of assignees, largely biotech companies working on engineered T-cell and gene-editing platforms, hold most of the claim positions. Fifth place holds only 4 records and tenth place just 1, so the ranking runs from one dominant filer down to single-filing entrants rather than a broad, even spread.
Filings rose sharply to a peak of 29 in 2022, then declined to 6 by 2024 — a drop of 68% over that three-year span. That said, 2025 and 2026 figures in this dataset are still incomplete because publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years understate true activity and should not be read as confirmation the field has cooled further. The safest complete-year comparison available is 2021 to 2024, and that comparison already shows a real pullback from the 2022 peak.
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears in 90.5% of the 74 records in scope, C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) in 67.6%, A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) in 70.3%, and C07K (peptides and proteins) in 47.3%. These shares add up to more than 100% because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes. By contrast, G01N (material analysis and testing) shows up in only 1.4% of records, indicating that despite potency-consistency and cost-of-goods manufacturing being part of the search scope, few filings claim the analytical or QC methods directly.
US20240358761A1, filed by Sana Biotechnology and published 2024-10-31, covers engineered cells carrying one or more modifications for use in allogeneic cell therapy, including hypoimmunogenic cell embodiments designed to reduce immune rejection without a matched donor. It sits within the C12N and A61K classes that dominate this landscape's technology composition. Anyone developing hypoimmune or immune-evasive allogeneic cell platforms should review its specific modification claims directly, since genetic-modification claims of this kind are where this field's density is concentrated.
The clearest gap sits in process analytics and cost-control methods: G01N (material analysis and testing) covers only 1.4% of the 74 records in scope, far below the 90.5% carried by core medicinal-preparation claims. Potency-assay standardisation, cost-of-goods process controls, and batch-size scale-up methods are named in the search scope itself but are thinly represented in actual claim language. A first filing built around a specific, reproducible release assay or scale-up protocol is more likely to find open claim space than another cell-engineering or gene-editing filing, where five assignees already hold 87.8% of records.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Allogeneic Cell Therapy Manufacturing in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole allogeneic cell therapy manufacturing 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.