Bispecific T-Cell Engager Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- Filing peaked in 2017 at 28 records and has declined since, with the 2022 midpoint at just 9 — a sign the core antibody-format claims were staked out early.
- The top 5 assignees hold 67.4% of all 89 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 91.0% — this is a field with a short, dense leadership tier and almost no long tail beyond it.
- Cytokine-release mitigation is where recent activity concentrates, including the most-cited recent filing on IL-4/IL-10 co-administration to blunt CRS without dropping T-cell engagement.
What the filing record shows
Bispecific T-cell engager patenting sits at the intersection of antibody engineering and oncology therapeutics, and the 89 records in scope reflect a field that moved fast early and has since cooled. The search spans cytokine release, half-life extension, target selection, step-up dosing and manufacturability claim language layered onto the core C07K16/A61K39/A61P35 classification — in other words, not just the antibody format itself but the clinical-management patents built around administering it safely.
Filing rose to a peak in 2017 and has trended down through the 2022 midpoint to a much smaller recent-year count, though the most recent year is necessarily undercounted because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months. Read the decline as a maturing claim space rather than a shrinking field: the foundational bispecific formats were claimed early, and later filings increasingly target adjunct therapy — dosing regimens, cytokine-release countermeasures, half-life extension chemistry — rather than the antibody scaffold itself.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 89 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims sit in.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filing peaked in 2017 at 28 records, fell toward a midpoint of 9 in 2022, and stands at 2 in the most recent (partial) year. Treat the tail end as understated rather than as evidence of an ending field.
IPC subclass composition
A61K (medicinal preparations) and C07K (peptides and proteins) each cover the large majority of the 89 records, confirming this is fundamentally an antibody-therapeutic corpus. A61P and C12N each cover roughly half the records, reflecting the therapeutic-activity and genetic-engineering claim layers built on top of the core antibody format. Because records can carry multiple classes, these shares add up to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 89 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Bispecific T-Cell Engagers with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about bispecific t-cell engagers and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited and most recent filings
US12552849B2 — Method of reducing BiTE/CAR-T mediated cytokine release syndrome using IL-4, IL-10 or a fusion protein thereof
The disclosure provides for various methods including a method of reducing the severity of bispecific T-cell engager (BiTE) or chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CAR-T) induced cytokine release syndrome (CRS), comprising administering to a patient in need thereof an amount of a composition comprising an interleukin 10 (IL-10) or an IL-10 agent, an interleukin 4 (IL-4) or an IL-4 agent, or combinations thereof.Granted to Deka Biosciences, dated 2026-02-17 — one of the most recent grants in this dataset and the clearest signal of where post-2022 filing has concentrated.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2018041838A1 | Adenovirus armed with bispecific t cell engager (BITE) | 82 |
| 2 | WO2018041827A1 | Adenovirus armed with bispecific t cell engager (BITE) | 45 |
| 3 | WO2019157533A1 | Chimeric antigen receptors targeting the tumor microenvironment | 24 |
| 4 | US20230340052A1 | Method of reducing bispecific t cell engager or chimeric antigen receptor t cell mediated cytokine release sy… | 20 |
| 5 | US20190233536A1 | Adenovirus armed with bispecific t cell engager (BITE) | 15 |
| 6 | US20210038646A1 | Chimeric antigen receptors targeting the tumor microenvironment | 13 |
| 7 | US20190194690A1 | Adenovirus armed with bispecific t cell engager (BITE) | 13 |
| 8 | WO2021216731A1 | Polyspecific binding molecules and their use in cell therapy | 10 |
| 9 | WO2021009263A1 | Antibodies having specificity for CD38 and uses thereof | 5 |
| 10 | WO2020243603A1 | Dosing of bispecific t cell engager | 3 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply by virtue of being searchable longer — treat them as a signal of influence within this corpus, not 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 patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the classification data are read together.
A short leadership tier, not a crowded field
With the top 5 holding 67.4% of all records and the top 10 holding 91.0%, this is not a fragmented landscape with many small players — it is a small number of assignees who staked out the core claim space early, plus a thin band of secondary filers.
Core-format claims came early; adjunct claims came later
The steep decline from the 2017 peak suggests the fundamental bispecific antibody architectures were claimed within a narrow early window. Later activity, including the 2026 representative filing on cytokine-release mitigation, targets clinical-management methods layered around an already-claimed format.
Antibody chemistry dominates; therapeutic-activity claims are secondary
The overwhelming majority of records sit in medicinal-preparation and peptide/protein classes, with therapeutic-activity (A61P) and genetic-engineering (C12N) classes each covering roughly half the corpus — a sign that most inventive effort still centres on the molecule, not solely on the treatment protocol.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to bispecific t-cell engagers, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is thinning
The ranking is dominated by a handful of assignees, and recent-year momentum data shows that even leaders have slowed sharply.
A clear front-runner by volume
The leading assignee's 30 records is roughly four times the fifth-place count of 7, underlining how top-heavy this landscape is even within its own top tier.
Even active filers have gone quiet
Recent-year momentum figures show most tracked assignees, including several with historically strong positions, recording zero or negative year-over-year filing activity — consistent with the broader post-2017 decline in the trend data.
Co-filing is limited and concentrated
Only 5 co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, with the strongest pairing linked to a French academic-medical research consortium — co-filing here looks more like institutional-industry partnership than broad ecosystem collaboration.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Amgen Inc. | 1 | 0% |
| Deka Biosciences, Inc. | 1 | — |
| Akamis Bio Ltd | 0 | -100% |
| Sunnybay Biotech Inc. | 0 | — |
| The General Hospital Corporation | 0 | — |
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | 0 | -100% |
| University of Paris | 0 | -100% |
| Amphivena Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The landscape data points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or spotting an open filing angle.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leadership tier
With 91.0% of records held by the top 10 assignees, any new filing in the core antibody-format space should be checked against that concentrated set before drafting claims.
Run a clearance searchTrack the cytokine-release mitigation cluster
The most recent high-citation filing targets CRS mitigation via IL-4/IL-10 co-administration — a narrower, more active corner of the field than the core antibody format.
Explore this clusterProbe the under-claimed adjacent branches
Sub-areas like half-life extension via non-Fc scaffolds and manufacturability of tandem scFv formats show comparatively thin dedicated filing relative to the core corpus.
Map the white spaceCommon questions about this landscape
The ranked list in this dataset contains 21 companies, and it is heavily top-loaded: the leading assignee holds 30 of the 89 records in scope, while the top 5 assignees combined hold 67.4% of all records. By the tenth-ranked assignee the count has fallen to just 3, so the field has a short, dense leadership tier rather than a broad spread of active filers. Anyone assessing competitive position in this space should focus diligence on that top tier rather than treating the full ranked list as evenly weighted.
Filing peaked in 2017 at 28 records and had fallen to 9 by the 2022 midpoint, with only 2 records in the most recent, still-partial year. This pattern reads as a maturing rather than a dying field: the core antibody-format claims appear to have been staked out in the earlier window, and remaining activity has shifted toward adjunct methods like cytokine-release management. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent year's low count should not be read as the field stopping — it is simply undercounted so far.
US12552849B2, granted to Deka Biosciences in February 2026, claims methods of reducing cytokine release syndrome caused by bispecific T-cell engager or CAR-T therapy through administration of interleukin-10, interleukin-4, or a fusion protein combining the two. It does not claim the bispecific antibody format itself; it claims a therapeutic-management method layered on top of BiTE or CAR-T administration. Anyone developing a CRS-mitigation protocol alongside a T-cell engager therapy should review this claim scope specifically, since it targets the clinical co-administration step rather than the underlying antibody molecule.
Based on the IPC composition and filing patterns in this dataset, sub-areas such as half-life extension via non-Fc scaffolds, manufacturability of tandem scFv formats, and target-selection biomarkers tied to cytokine-release risk show comparatively little dedicated filing relative to the dense core antibody-chemistry classes (A61K and C07K, which cover 95.5% and 92.1% of records respectively). These are not guaranteed white space — they simply show lower documented activity within this specific search scope — but they are reasonable starting points for a narrower freedom-to-operate check before drafting new claims.
Concentration is high by two measures: the top 5 assignees hold 67.4% of the 89 records in scope, and the top 10 hold 91.0%. That leaves fewer than 10% of records spread across the remaining ranked assignees, several of which appear only once or twice. For a new entrant, this means the practical competitive landscape is really defined by a handful of organisations, not by the full 21-company ranked list.
Research Bispecific T-Cell Engagers in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole bispecific t-cell engagers 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.