CRISPR Nucleic Acid Detection Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
- Filing peaked in 2023 at 6 records and fell to 1 by 2024, an 80% drop from 2021's count of 5 — the sharpest swing in the dataset.
- Nine assignees make up the entire ranked field with the leader holding 3 records and fifth place holding 2, so no single organisation controls the space outright.
- C12Q coverage sits at 91.7% of the 12 records in scope while G01N-classed material-analysis claims appear in just 1 record — a narrow gap worth checking before filing.
Filing growth compares 2021 (5 records) with 2024 (1) — 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.
What this landscape covers
This review covers patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine CRISPR-based collateral cleavage detection with claims touching guide RNA design, reporter cleavage, preamplification requirements, variant specificity, one-pot reaction formats, or signal amplification. The scope is deliberately narrow: 12 published records sit inside it, spread across 9 ranked assignees. That is a small, young field rather than a saturated one.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any trend chart are still filling in and should not be read as a slowdown. The last year that can be treated as complete is 2024.
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
The filing curve and the IPC breakdown below are drawn directly from the 12 records in scope. Read the most recent one or two years as provisional, not as a trend.
A sharp rise, then an unfinished drop
Filings ran at zero through 2017, climbed to a peak of 6 in 2023, then fell to 1 in 2024 — an 80% decline from the 2021 level of 5. Because 2025 and 2026 are still being published, this reads as a field that surged around 2021-2023 rather than one now confirmed to be shrinking.
Detection chemistry dominates; material-analysis claims are rare
C12Q (enzyme/DNA measuring and testing) appears in 91.7% of the 12 records, and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) in 58.3%. G01N (material analysis and testing) appears in just 8.3% — a single record — suggesting most applicants are claiming the biochemistry of detection itself rather than the instrumentation or material-science layer around it.
Shares are the percentage of the 12 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on CRISPR-Based Nucleic Acid Detection with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about crispr-based nucleic acid detection and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited families and a representative filing
US20250101497A1 — Thermostable RNA Polymerase (Wageningen University)
The invention relates to a protein having at least 50% sequence identity with SEQ ID NO:1, and its use in in vitro transcription methods. The invention further relates to a nucleic acid molecule encoding the protein and to a host cell expressing the protein.Filed by Wageningen University and published 2025-03-27, this record sits in the upstream reagent layer — a thermostable polymerase for in vitro transcription — rather than in the CRISPR effector or reporter-cleavage layer that the most-cited records occupy.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2022051667A1 | Crispr effector system based diagnostics for virus detection | 12 |
| 2 | WO2023164694A2 | ONE-POT ENDONUCLEOLYTICALLY EXPONENTIATED ROLLING CIRCLE AMPLIFICATION BY CRISPR-CAS12a | 10 |
| 3 | US20240102115A1 | Crispr effector system based diagnostics for virus detection | 5 |
| 4 | US20250154482A1 | Systems and methods for nucleic acid detection | 1 |
| 5 | US20220243264A1 | Systems and methods for amplifying RNA | 1 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had more time to be cited; treat this as a signal of influence within the corpus, not of current commercial importance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (5 of 5 rows); 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 raw counts are read against each other: where claim density sits, how concentrated ownership is, and what the citation table says about which architectures matter.
The surge has not yet been confirmed as sustained
Filings ran from 5 in 2021 down to 1 in 2024, but 2025-2026 records are still arriving under the usual 18-month publication lag. Read this as a field that had a defined filing window around 2021-2023, not as one in confirmed decline.
No single assignee dominates the ranked field
The leading assignee holds 3 records and fifth place holds 2, across a ranking of 9 organisations. That spread, combined with a total of only 2 co-assignee pairs, points to mostly independent filing rather than a settled licensing or joint-development structure.
Detection chemistry is the crowded layer
Almost every record in scope carries a C12Q classification, covering enzyme- and DNA-based measuring and testing. C12N (microorganisms/genetic engineering) follows at 58.3%. Claims tied to the underlying detection biochemistry face the densest prior art in this dataset.
Virus-detection effector systems anchor the citation table
The two most-cited records both describe CRISPR effector systems for virus detection, cited 12 and 5 times respectively, while a one-pot rolling-circle amplification family sits close behind at 10 citations. Newer filings such as the 2025 nucleic-acid detection system carry only 1 citation so far, consistent with how young they are rather than how significant they may become.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to crispr-based nucleic acid detection, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the claim space is still open
The ranked field is small and academic in character: universities and research institutes account for most of the entries, with only one industrial filer visible in the ranking. That leaves several technical sub-areas thinly claimed.
A modest lead, not a dominant one
The top-ranked assignee holds 3 of the records in the ranking of 9 organisations. That is enough to set direction on effector-system claims but not enough to foreclose the field for new entrants working on adjacent detection formats.
Institutions mostly file alone
Only two co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, the strongest linking two academic institutions on two records. This is a field of largely independent filers rather than one built on cross-licensing or joint ventures.
US and PCT routes carry most of the filing activity
The United States receives the largest single share of filings, with WIPO's PCT route close behind, and the United Kingdom and EPO trailing. That pattern points to applicants seeking US protection first, with PCT used to keep international options open.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Wageningen University | 0 | — |
| The Broad Institute, Inc. | 0 | — |
| University of Florida Research Foundation, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Suzhou Vertex Biological Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| President and Fellows of Harvard College | 0 | — |
| The General Hospital Corporation | 0 | — |
| University of Connecticut | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to a field still short of a settled ownership structure, with specific technical layers left comparatively open.
Check the reagent layer before the effector layer
Effector-system and virus-detection claims carry the most citations and the densest C12Q coverage. Upstream reagent work, such as thermostable polymerases for in vitro transcription, shows lighter claim density and may be the more tractable place to file.
Explore reagent-layer filings in EurekaWatch for the 2025-2026 catch-up
The apparent drop after 2023 is partly a publication-lag artefact. Re-check filing counts for 2025 and 2026 once those years finish publishing, rather than treating the current trend as final.
Track filing trends in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
This dataset contains 12 published patent families that combine CRISPR-based collateral cleavage detection with claims on guide RNA design, reporter cleavage, preamplification, variant specificity, one-pot formats, or signal amplification, covering 2015 through mid-2026. That is a narrow, well-defined slice of the broader CRISPR diagnostics field, not a count of every CRISPR-related patent. Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025-2026 count will rise as more records are published.
The ranking covers 9 assignees, all captured by the data endpoint rather than trimmed to a top-50 or top-100 list. The leading assignee holds 3 records and the organisation in fifth place holds 2, which is a modest lead rather than a dominant one. Most of the ranked organisations are universities or research institutes, with only limited industrial representation and very few co-assignee filings between them.
Filings rose to a peak of 6 in 2023 after starting from zero in 2017, then fell to 1 by 2024, an 80% decline from the 5 filings recorded in 2021. That drop should not be read as a confirmed slowdown, because 2025 and 2026 records are still being published under the normal 18-month lag between filing and publication. The honest read is a defined filing surge around 2021-2023 whose aftermath is not yet fully visible.
C12Q, covering enzyme- and DNA-based measuring and testing, appears in 91.7% of the 12 records in scope, making it the dominant classification by a wide margin. C12N, covering microorganisms and genetic engineering, follows at 58.3%. G01N, material analysis and testing, appears in only 8.3% of records, suggesting the instrumentation and material-science side of detection is comparatively unclaimed relative to the underlying biochemistry.
US20250101497A1, filed by Wageningen University and published in March 2025, claims a thermostable protein with at least 50% sequence identity to a specified sequence, its use in in vitro transcription methods, and the nucleic acid encoding it. It sits in the upstream reagent layer rather than in the CRISPR effector or reporter-cleavage claims that dominate the most-cited records in this dataset. Anyone building an in vitro transcription step for a one-pot detection assay using a closely related thermostable polymerase should review this claim's sequence-identity threshold directly.
The clearest gap by classification is G01N, material analysis and testing, present in only 1 of the 12 records, pointing to light claim density around instrumentation and readout hardware paired with CRISPR-based reactions. Recent low-citation records also cluster around preamplification-free variant discrimination and thermostable-reagent formats for one-pot assays. These are not guarantees of freedom to operate, but they are areas where the existing claim density in this dataset is thin enough to warrant a closer look before assuming the space is occupied.
Research CRISPR-Based Nucleic Acid Detection in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole crispr-based nucleic acid detection 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.