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/controlled-and-targeted-drug-delivery-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Pharmaceutical Manufacturing & Drug DeliveryControlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patents: Where Filing Concentrates and Where It Doesn't
- 15.6% sits with a handful of filers. The top 5 assignees account for 8,973 of 57,638 records in scope — concentrated, but with a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants behind them.
- Filing has cooled from its 2018 peak. Annual filings fell from 753 in 2021 to 449 in 2024, a 40% drop over that span — though 2025-2026 counts are still filling in given typical publication lag.
- Medicinal preparations dominate the claim map. A61K covers 27.5% of all records, more than any other IPC subclass, with peptide and protein chemistry (C07K) a distant second at 16.8%.
57.6K
Published Records
16%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-40%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (753 records) with 2024 (449) — 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 57,638 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This landscape draws on 57,638 patent records published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine controlled or targeted drug delivery language with dosage form, delivery carrier, binding assay or release-profile claims. The scope spans small-molecule controlled-release formulations, biologic delivery constructs, and the assay and testing methods used to characterise them — a broad but coherent slice of pharmaceutical manufacturing IP.
Records are drawn from filings at the USPTO, EPO, WIPO/PCT, and national offices including Australia, Canada and Singapore, giving a view across the jurisdictions where delivery-technology claims are most actively contested.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
The Data
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 57,638-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which technology classes carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran from 840 in 2017 to a peak of 929 in 2018, then declined through the mid-2020s — 753 in 2021 down to 449 in 2024, a 40% fall over three years. The 2025 and 2026 figures (down to 33 in the partial latest year) understate real activity because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months; treat the most recent two years as incomplete rather than as a continued decline.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61K (medicinal preparations) leads at 27.5% of all records, followed by C07K (peptides & proteins) at 16.8% and A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) at 13.3%. Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares sum to more than 100% — the pattern shows where claim density is concentrated, not a partition of the corpus. Fermentation/enzymatic synthesis (C12P) and nucleic acid chemistry (C07H) sit well below 3% each, indicating comparatively lighter claim coverage.
Shares are the percentage of the 57,638 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 Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about controlled & targeted drug delivery patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
A representative filing
Representative Record
Controlled release dosage forms of zolpidem (US20100055181A1, Lupin Limited)
LUPIN LIMITED
A controlled-release dosage form of zolpidem or a salt thereof, designed to induce rapid sleep onset and then maintain effective plasma concentrations over an extended period. The filing specifies a dissolution profile tied to U.S. Pharmacopoeia apparatus and buffer conditions, with less than 40% release at 30 minutes.Filed by Lupin Limited, published 2010-03-04.
Most-cited records in this landscape
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US8008449B2 | Human monoclonal antibodies to programmed death 1 (PD-1) and methods for treating cancer using anti-PD-1 anti… | 4,534 |
| 2 | US20030157108A1 | Glycoprotein compositions | 4,089 |
| 3 | WO2006121168A1 | Human monoclonal antibodies to programmed death 1(PD-1) and methods for treating cancer using Anti-PD-1 antib… | 3,727 |
| 4 | WO2007005874A2 | Human monoclonal antibodies to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-l1) | 2,971 |
| 5 | US7943743B2 | Human monoclonal antibodies to programmed death ligand 1 (PD-L1) | 2,915 |
| 6 | US7498298B2 | Monomethylvaline compounds capable of conjugation to ligands | 2,747 |
| 7 | WO2001014424A2 | Human CTLA-4 antibodies and their uses | 2,383 |
| 8 | US7527791B2 | Humanized anti-TGF-beta antibodies | 2,278 |
| 9 | US4975278A | Antibody-enzyme conjugates in combination with prodrugs for the delivery of cytotoxic agents to tumor cells | 2,237 |
| 10 | WO2012145493A1 | Antibodies and other molecules that bind b7-h1 and PD-1 | 2,068 |
Ranked by citation count within this corpus. Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations, so read this as a signal of influence within the searched set rather than of current commercial importance.
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 Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 filing strategy
Three signals from the corpus that matter more than the raw ranking: where claim density sits, how filing volume has moved, and where jurisdiction choice concentrates.
Technology density
27.5%
of records carry A61K
Medicinal preparations dominate the claim map
More than a quarter of all 57,638 records touch A61K, the medicinal-preparations subclass. That density means formulation and dosage-form claims sit on thick prior art; freedom-to-operate work in this subclass needs to be granular, not a broad novelty search.
IPC subclass share, all records in scope
Filing momentum
-40%
2021 to 2024 filing change
Volume has pulled back from its 2018 peak
Annual filings dropped from 753 in 2021 to 449 in 2024. That is a real three-year decline, not an artefact of publication lag, since 2024 is the last year with a complete count. It suggests some incumbents have already staked their core claims and shifted effort elsewhere.
Complete-year filing counts, 2021 vs 2024
Jurisdiction concentration
7,806
US-office records
The US remains the primary filing venue
The USPTO accounts for the largest single share of receiving-office records, ahead of EPO (3,474) and WIPO/PCT (3,281). Filers targeting delivery-technology protection should treat US prosecution as the default first venue rather than an afterthought to a PCT filing.
Receiving office counts across the corpus
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 controlled & targeted drug delivery patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Co-assignee activity
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Xisike Limited | TANG Y TOM | 140 |
| Xisike Limited | LIU CHENGHUA | 111 |
| Xisike Limited | DRMANAC RADOJE T | 98 |
| The Regents of the University of California | Pfizer Inc. | 71 |
| Xisike Limited | ZHOU PING | 69 |
| Xisike Limited | ASUNDI VINOD | 68 |
| Xisike Limited | BOYLE BRYAN J | 66 |
| Xisike Limited | WANG JIAN RUI | 50 |
Ten co-assignee pairs appear in the data, with the strongest pairing recurring across multiple linked filings — a signal of a sustained joint-development relationship rather than a one-off collaboration.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders draw heavily from large biologics and pharma innovators, but concentration at the top is modest — the field has a long tail of entrants filing once or twice rather than building a portfolio.
Leader
3,752
records
A single leader, then a steep drop-off
The top-ranked assignee holds 3,752 records, well ahead of fifth place at 941 and tenth place at 635. The gap between first and fifth is wide enough that leadership here reflects sustained, decades-long filing programmes rather than a recent surge.
Leader vs 5th and 10th place, records
Concentration
15.6%
of 57,638 records
Top 5 hold a modest but real share
The five leading assignees combined account for 8,973 records, 15.6% of all records in scope. That leaves the large majority of filings distributed across a long tail of companies, universities and individual filers — this is not a field locked up by two or three players.
Top 5 combined share of all records in scope
Momentum
-89% to -100%
YoY, latest year
Recent-year activity has slowed across the ranked leaders
Several of the most active historical filers show sharp year-on-year declines in the latest year, some down to zero. Given the 18-month publication lag, this likely reflects incomplete recent data rather than an actual halt in R&D — but it also means the leaderboard understates who is filing right now.
Recent-year filing change by assignee
Recent filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Bristol Myers Squibb | 1 | -89% |
| Zensun (Shanghai) Sci-Tech Co., Ltd. | 1 | 0% |
| Novartis AG (Switzerland) | 0 | -100% |
| Genentech, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Medarex, Inc. | 0 | — |
| AbbVie Inc. | 0 | — |
| Xisike Limited | 0 | — |
| Abbott Laboratories | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 landscape points to specific next steps depending on whether you are clearing a formulation, scouting a licence target, or building a filing strategy.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on A61K claims
With 27.5% of records touching medicinal preparations, a general novelty search will not surface the granular formulation claims that matter. Narrow to dosage form and release-profile language before concluding a route is clear.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaMap the long tail behind the leader
Concentration is modest at 15.6% for the top 5, meaning most of the field's activity sits outside the ranked leaders. A licence or acquisition target search should look past the obvious names.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaWatch the under-claimed branches before they fill in
Enzymatic and nucleic-acid delivery sub-areas carry lighter claim density today. That gap narrows as biologics delivery matures, so early filing there carries more leverage than in the crowded A61K core.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about this landscape
This landscape covers 57,638 published patent records between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine controlled or targeted drug delivery language with dosage form, delivery carrier or release-profile claims. That figure counts patent families in the assignee ranking, which is the fairer unit than raw document counts because it neutralises multi-jurisdiction filing and continuation practice. The true worldwide total is larger since this scope is defined by a specific search string and date window, not by the entire field.
The ranked leaders are dominated by large biologics and pharmaceutical innovators, with the top assignee holding 3,752 records against 941 for fifth place and 635 for tenth. The top 5 combined account for 15.6% of all 57,638 records in scope, which is a meaningful but not dominant concentration. Most filing activity sits with a long tail of companies and institutions outside this ranked leadership group, so portfolio strength should be checked directly rather than assumed from name recognition alone.
Complete-year data shows a real decline: filings fell from 753 in 2021 to 449 in 2024, a 40% drop over that three-year span, down from a 2018 peak of 929. The 2025 and 2026 figures look even lower, but that reflects publication lag of roughly 18 months rather than an actual stop in filing activity. Treat any year within the last 18 months as provisional and rely on the 2021-2024 window for a real growth-rate read.
US20100055181A1, filed by Lupin Limited, claims a controlled-release dosage form of zolpidem designed to induce rapid sleep onset and then sustain effective plasma concentrations over an extended period. The claims are tied to a specific dissolution profile measured under U.S. Pharmacopoeia conditions, with less than 40% of the drug released at 30 minutes. Anyone formulating a zolpidem controlled-release product needs to check their own dissolution curve against this specific threshold rather than assume a generic sustained-release approach avoids it.
Technology composition shows heavy claim density in medicinal preparations (A61K, 27.5% of records) and peptide/protein chemistry (C07K, 16.8%), but much lighter coverage in fermentation and enzymatic synthesis (C12P, 2.5%) and nucleic-acid chemistry (C07H, 1.8%). Enzymatic release-triggering mechanisms and nucleic-acid delivery vehicles sit in this lighter-claimed territory. These branches are good candidates for early, well-scoped filings before the space fills in the way the A61K core already has.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Controlled & Targeted Drug Delivery Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole controlled & targeted drug delivery 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.