Biosensors Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- One leader, then a long tail. The top assignee holds 54 records while the ranked leaders' combined top 5 account for just 11.6% of all 1,944 records in scope.
- Filing has cooled from its 2017 peak. 92 records published in 2017 versus 8 so far in 2026, with 2021-to-2024 volume down 31% on the last complete comparison.
- Material analysis and diagnosis dominate the claims. G01N and A61B each cover close to 29% of all records, leaving digital processing and healthcare informatics classes comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (84 records) with 2024 (58) — 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 1,944 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the biosensors patent record actually shows
The dataset covers 1,944 published records filed against bioaffinity, biological and biochemical sensor claims combined with sensor signal, calibration, measurement error or detection circuit language, spanning 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off. It captures both diagnostic-device filings and the underlying signal-processing and detection-circuit claims that make those devices work, which is why material analysis (G01N) and diagnosis and surgery (A61B) classes each touch close to three in ten records.
Filing volume peaked in 2017 and has since eased, though the most recent one to two years are always undercounted because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months. The assignee base is broad rather than narrow: a single leader sits well ahead of the field, but the combined top 5 still account for only a modest share of all records, which points to a fragmented, multi-player technology rather than one locked up by a handful of firms.
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 1,944 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Publications ran from 92 in 2017 to 8 in 2026 (a partial year). The most recent complete comparison, 2021 to 2024, shows volume down 31%, from 84 to 58 records; treat 2025 and 2026 figures as still filling in rather than as evidence of a further decline.
IPC subclass composition
G01N (material analysis and testing) and A61B (diagnosis and surgery) each appear in roughly 28-29% of the 1,944 records, followed by G06F (digital data processing) at 11.5%, A61N (electrotherapy) at 9.6%, C12Q (enzyme/DNA measurement) at 8.5%, G16H (healthcare informatics) at 5.5%, H05B (heating and lighting circuits) at 4.7% and A61M (body fluid devices) at 4.6%. Because a record can carry several classes, these shares sum to well over 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,944 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Biosensors Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about biosensors patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
Wearable microfluidic bioaffinity sensor for automatic molecular analysis (US20240023880A1)
The filing describes a wearable biosensor combining an iontophoresis module that stimulates a sweat sample from the skin, a microfluidic module that mixes that sample with labelled detection reagents and routes the mixture to a detection reservoir, and a bioaffinity sensor assembly that quantifies the bound biomarkers to determine their concentration.Filed by California Institute of Technology; published 2024-01-25.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20070010702A1 | Medical device with low magnetic susceptibility | 1,511 |
| 2 | US20090240193A1 | Systems and methods for customizing delivery of sensor data | 1,279 |
| 3 | US6066075A | Direct feedback controller for user interaction | 1,030 |
| 4 | US20090240128A1 | Systems and methods for blood glucose monitoring and alert delivery | 1,022 |
| 5 | US4612934A | Non-invasive multiprogrammable tissue stimulator | 788 |
| 6 | US4793353A | Non-invasive multiprogrammable tissue stimulator and method | 721 |
| 7 | US20050043894A1 | Integrated biosensor and simulation system for diagnosis and therapy | 719 |
| 8 | US20090054737A1 | Wireless physiological sensor patches and systems | 682 |
| 9 | US20050249667A1 | Process for treating a biological organism | 603 |
| 10 | US20050107870A1 | Medical device with multiple coating layers | 578 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations inside the corpus; read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking of current commercial importance.
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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three read-throughs of the data that matter more than the raw counts.
No single company controls the claim space
The leading assignee holds 54 records and fifth place holds 38, but the combined top 5 still account for only 11.6% of all 1,944 records in scope. That is a fragmented field: a strong position at the top does not translate into a chokehold on the technology overall, and a new entrant is not automatically boxed out by one or two incumbents.
Volume has eased from its 2017 peak, not collapsed
Filings ran from 92 records in 2017 down to 58 in 2024, a 31% decline over the 2021-to-2024 window. 2025 and 2026 figures will keep rising as publications catch up, since publication typically lags filing by about 18 months.
Sensing hardware and clinical application are equally claimed
G01N (material analysis and testing) and A61B (diagnosis and surgery) are almost tied for the largest share of the 1,944 records, each near 29%. That overlap reflects how biosensor claims routinely bridge the measurement mechanism and its clinical use in a single filing.
US filings dominate, PCT and EPO follow
The United States receives the largest share of filings at 936, ahead of the EPO at 315 and WIPO/PCT at 236, with Australia, Canada and Austria trailing further behind. That pattern points to the US as the primary commercial battleground, with PCT filings used to keep international options open.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to biosensors patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is thinning out
The assignee ranking spans 100 companies counted by record; the pattern is a clear leader followed by a long tail rather than a tight oligopoly.
One clear leader by volume
The top-ranked assignee holds 54 records, well ahead of fifth place at 38 and tenth place at 30. That gap suggests sustained, deliberate filing rather than opportunistic single filings, but the leader's share of the full 1,944-record corpus is still modest.
A shallow drop-off from fifth to tenth
Records held by the fifth- and tenth-ranked assignees differ by only eight, indicating a competitive mid-field rather than a sharp cliff after the leader. Combined, the top 10 account for 20.1% of all 1,944 records in scope.
Momentum has cooled even among ranked filers
Several of the most active historical assignees show zero filings in the latest year, with year-over-year drops as steep as -100% for some. That does not necessarily mean exit from the space; it is consistent with the 18-month publication lag understating the most recent activity across the whole corpus.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Gentuity LLC | 1 | -75% |
| Digital Lumens Holding Co LLC | 0 | — |
| General Electric Co | 0 | — |
| Medtronic Inc | 0 | — |
| Sony Group Corp | 0 | -100% |
| Gentex Corp | 0 | -100% |
| Koninklijke Philips N.V. (Royal Philips) | 0 | — |
| Ilumen San Diego Inc | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The figures above describe the field as it stands; the next step is usually narrower and specific to a product or claim set.
Check freedom to operate on a specific claim
Filing density in G01N and A61B does not mean a given claim is blocked; it means the space is busy. Run the exact claim language against the most-cited records before committing engineering resources.
Explore claims in Patsnap EurekaTrack the assignees still filing
Momentum has cooled broadly, but not for every entity in the ranking. Watching which of the 100 ranked assignees keep filing, versus which have gone quiet, is a better signal than the aggregate trend.
Set up assignee tracking in Patsnap EurekaCommon questions about the biosensors patent landscape
The assignee ranking covers 100 companies counted by record, with one clear leader holding 54 records ahead of a field that thins out gradually rather than dropping off sharply. The combined top 5 account for 11.6% of all 1,944 records in scope, and the top 10 for 20.1%, which means no single company or small group controls the technology. This is a fragmented field with room for new entrants to build a meaningful position without displacing an entrenched incumbent.
Filings peaked in 2017 at 92 records and have eased since, with the most recent complete comparison showing a 31% decline from 84 records in 2021 to 58 in 2024. Figures for 2025 and 2026 will continue to rise as publications catch up, because publication typically lags the actual filing date by around 18 months. So the honest read is a cooling trend through 2024, not a collapse, and the newest years should not be read as confirming further decline yet.
G01N (material analysis and testing) and A61B (diagnosis and surgery) are the two largest classes, each appearing in roughly 28-29% of the 1,944 records. G06F (digital data processing), A61N (electrotherapy), and C12Q (enzyme and DNA measurement) follow at meaningfully lower shares. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these percentages add up to well over 100% of the record total, and that overlap itself is informative: it shows how often a single filing covers both the sensing mechanism and its clinical application.
Based on the technology composition, classes like G16H (healthcare informatics) and A61M (body fluid devices) carry noticeably lower record shares than the dominant G01N and A61B classes, suggesting less claim density around software integration and fluid-handling specifics. Sub-areas such as sweat-based calibration circuitry, wearable microfluidic reagent mixing and low-power detection threshold circuits show up as comparatively thin relative to the core sensing classes. Any white-space claim should still be checked against the most-cited prior art before being treated as genuinely open.
A high citation count inside this corpus, such as records cited over a thousand times, mainly reflects how long a filing has been available to accumulate citations, not that it remains the most commercially important claim today. Older filings have a structural advantage in citation counts simply due to age. Use citation rank as a signal of which claims shaped later filings and search strategy, and pair it with recent filing and assignee-momentum data before deciding what actually matters for a current freedom-to-operate question.
Research Biosensors Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole biosensors patent landscape 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.