Drug-to-Antibody Ratio Patents: Leaders, Trends & White Space 2026
- 22.5% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees hold 2,260 of 10,047 records in scope — dense claim coverage around a small group of ADC originators, not a fragmented field.
- Filing has cooled since 2024. Annual filings peaked at 833 in 2024 after climbing from 693 in 2017; the 2026 count of 67 is a partial year, not a collapse, but momentum has flattened since the 2022 midpoint of 609.
- Analytical-method classes are thin. G01N (material analysis and testing) covers only 11.1% of records and C12Q (enzyme/DNA-based measurement) just 4.0% — most of the claim density sits in composition-of-matter classes, not in the characterization methods themselves.
Filing growth compares 2021 (541 records) with 2024 (833) — 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 10,047 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Drug-to-antibody ratio (DAR) characterization sits at the intersection of antibody-drug conjugate (ADC) chemistry and analytical method development. This landscape tracks 10,047 records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine ADC/conjugate subject matter with methods such as hydrophobic interaction chromatography, native mass spectrometry, unconjugated antibody quantification, method comparability and specification setting. The scope captures both the payload-linker chemistry that defines a conjugate’s DAR and the analytical claims used to measure and control it.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent year in the trend is always an undercount — 2026 in particular should be read as partial, not as a real decline.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 10,047-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 693 in 2017 to a peak of 833 in 2024, passing through 609 at the 2022 midpoint. The 2026 figure of 67 reflects a partial year under the publication lag, not a sudden drop-off; the honest read is a plateau since 2022 rather than continued growth.
IPC subclass composition
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears on 82.7% of records and C07K (peptides and proteins) on 60.5%, confirming this is fundamentally a composition-of-matter field. Analytical-method classes are comparatively thin: G01N sits at 11.1% and C12Q at 4.0% of the 10,047 records, meaning most protection is built around the conjugate itself rather than the measurement method used to characterize it.
Shares are the percentage of the 10,047 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Drug-to-Antibody Ratio Characterization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about drug-to-antibody ratio characterization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
US20210102951A1 — Hydrophobic interaction chromatography-coupled native mass spectrometry for antibody analysis
The present invention provides rapid, sensitive high-throughput methods and systems for characterizing peptides or proteins using hydrophobic interaction chromatography-coupled native mass spectrometry to improve manufacturing process of biopharmaceutical products, such as identifying impurities during antibody purification, monitoring post-translational modification variants during production, or characterizing drug-to-antibody ratio of antibody-drug conjugates. The separation profiles of the peptides or proteins are generated and compared to identify or qualify the peptides or proteins.Filed by Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., published 2021-04-08.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US7498298B2 | Monomethylvaline compounds capable of conjugation to ligands | 2,746 |
| 2 | US20050238649A1 | Monomethylvaline compounds capable of conjugation to ligands | 1,652 |
| 3 | WO1992008802A1 | Bispecific antibodies, method of production, and uses thereof | 975 |
| 4 | WO2005081711A2 | Monomethylvaline compounds capable of conjugation to ligands | 858 |
| 5 | US7723485B2 | Cysteine engineered anti-MUC16 antibodies and antibody drug conjugates | 637 |
| 6 | WO2012059882A2 | Engineered polypeptide conjugates and methods for making thereof using transglutaminase | 476 |
| 7 | WO2002078524A2 | Translational profiling | 410 |
| 8 | US20080305044A1 | Engineered Antibodies and Immunoconjugates | 399 |
| 9 | US20100129314A1 | Potent conjugates and hydrophilic linkers | 382 |
| 10 | WO2009117531A1 | Auristatin drug linker conjugates | 370 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favor older filings that have had more time to accumulate references; treat this as a signal of influence on the field, not a ranking of current technical 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 strategy
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are put in context: where claim density concentrates, how filing momentum has moved, and which analytical routes remain comparatively open.
A small group holds a disproportionate share
The five leading assignees account for 2,260 of the 10,047 records in scope, and the top ten reach 3,860, or 38.4%. That is dense coverage concentrated among ADC originators and their platform partners rather than a field spread evenly across many filers.
Growth has flattened since 2022
Annual filings rose from 693 in 2017 to a peak of 833 in 2024, passing through 609 at the 2022 midpoint. The plateau since then, combined with a partial 2026 count of 67, suggests the field is maturing rather than still expanding.
Composition claims dominate over method claims
A61K appears on 82.7% of records and C07K on 60.5%, while G01N — the class most associated with analytical characterization methods — sits at just 11.1%. Claim space around the conjugate chemistry itself is far more crowded than the analytical method space around measuring it.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to drug-to-antibody ratio characterization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the gate sits
The ranked leaders in this dataset cover 100 companies; the concentration at the very top tells more about competitive posture than the long tail does.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 684 records against 361 at fifth place and 278 at tenth, a steep drop-off that marks this as a field with one dominant filer rather than several evenly matched ones.
Even active filers are pulling back
Assignees still filing in the latest year are doing so at reduced volume — year-over-year changes across the group range from roughly -53% to -80%, with only single-digit counts for most. This is consistent with the broader plateau in the filing trend rather than an isolated slowdown at any one company.
Filing is US-centric with strong EPO and PCT routes
The United States leads with 1,987 filings, followed by Europe (EPO) at 1,371 and WIPO/PCT at 1,137, with Australia, Israel and Canada each above 650. That spread indicates applicants are pursuing broad multi-jurisdiction protection rather than concentrating in a single market.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 8 | -53% |
| Seagen Inc. | 2 | -80% |
| Agensys, Inc. | 2 | -60% |
| Genmab A/S | 2 | -78% |
| Pfizer Inc. | 1 | 0% |
| AbbVie Inc. | 1 | -75% |
| aTyr Pharma, Inc. | 0 | — |
| AbbVie Stemcentrx LLC | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with dense composition claims but comparatively open analytical-method space. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific claim scope.
Map freedom-to-operate against the leading portfolios
With 22.5% of all records held by five assignees, a targeted claim-scope review of that cluster is a faster first step than a broad landscape search.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaPressure-test a method-claim angle
G01N and C12Q classes remain thin relative to A61K and C07K, suggesting room for a well-drafted analytical-method claim distinct from conjugate composition claims.
Run a claim-gap search in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
It covers both the analytical methods used to measure how many drug payload molecules are attached to each antibody in an ADC, and the conjugate chemistry itself that determines that ratio. In this dataset the search combines ADC/conjugate subject matter with method terms such as hydrophobic interaction chromatography, native mass spectrometry, unconjugated antibody quantification, method comparability and specification setting. Most records still sit in composition-of-matter classes like A61K and C07K rather than in dedicated analytical-method classes, which tells you where the bulk of existing claim coverage actually lies.
The ranking in this dataset covers 100 companies, with the top filer holding 684 records and a steep drop to 361 at fifth place and 278 at tenth. The five leading assignees together account for 22.5% of all 10,047 records in scope, and the leading ten reach 38.4%, indicating a field concentrated among a small number of ADC originators and their close partners rather than spread evenly across many filers. Co-assignee filing pairs above roughly 290 shared records point to tight platform collaborations behind some of that concentration.
Filing rose from 693 records in 2017 to a peak of 833 in 2024, but growth has flattened since the 2022 midpoint of 609, and the 2026 count of 67 is a partial year rather than a genuine collapse. Because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, any very recent year will always look artificially low. The honest read of the trend is a plateau since 2022, not continued acceleration or a sharp decline.
The clearest gap sits in analytical-method classes rather than conjugate composition: G01N, the class most associated with material analysis and testing, appears on only 11.1% of the 10,047 records in scope, and C12Q sits at just 4.0%. That contrasts with A61K at 82.7% and C07K at 60.5%, meaning most existing claim density protects the conjugate chemistry rather than the measurement method used on it. Specific sub-areas worth checking include native MS deconvolution workflows, real-time HIC-MS monitoring, and enzymatic release-based DAR measurement, each of which shows comparatively thin dedicated coverage.
Start with the leading assignees identified in the ranking, since 22.5% of all records in scope sit with just five companies, and check their claim scope in A61K and C07K before broadening the search. Then examine the highest-cited records, several of which relate to monomethylvaline conjugation chemistry and cysteine-engineered antibody-drug conjugates, since these tend to anchor the prior art that later filings must design around. Finally, compare against the thinner method classes like G01N and C12Q, where a well-drafted method claim may face less crowded prior art than a composition claim in the same filing.
Research Drug-to-Antibody Ratio Characterization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole drug-to-antibody ratio characterization 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.