Enamel Remineralization Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 63.8% concentration. The top five assignees together hold 286 of 448 records in scope — a field where a handful of players occupy most of the claim space.
- Growth has cooled, not stopped. Filings ran 2021's 17 down to 2024's 15, a -12% span on the last complete years, with 2025-2026 still filling in behind the usual publication lag.
- Cosmetics claims nearly match medicinal ones. 89.7% of records sit in A61K (medicinal preparations) and 57.1% also carry A61Q (cosmetics use), showing most filers claim both therapeutic and cosmetic use in the same family.
Filing growth compares 2021 (17 records) with 2024 (15) — 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 448 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 448 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine remineralization language — hydroxyapatite particles, casein phosphopeptide, lesion depth, substantivity — with dental and cosmetic claim scaffolding. The search string deliberately pairs a remineralization-active term with a measurement or delivery term, so the corpus skews toward records that make a testable claim about enamel repair rather than general oral-care formulations.
Filing activity clusters around a small number of assignees with long-running franchises in confectionery-delivered actives and stabilized calcium phosphate chemistry, alongside university-origin filings on amorphous calcium phosphate and fluoride co-delivery. The receiving-office spread — led by the United States, EPO and Australia — points to a field prosecuted mainly across mature regulatory markets rather than emerging ones.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 448-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how records distribute across IPC subclasses.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 13 in 2017 to a peak of 17 in 2019, then eased; the 2021-to-2024 span moved from 17 to 15, a -12% change over the last three years that can be treated as complete. 2025 and 2026 figures are undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
IPC subclass composition
A61K (medicinal preparations) covers 89.7% of the 448 records and A61Q (cosmetics use) 57.1%, so the majority of filings claim both a therapeutic and a cosmetic use within the same family. A61P (25.9%) reflects therapeutic-activity claims layered on top, while A61C (dentistry, 7.6%), A23G (confectionery, 6.9%), C01B (inorganic compounds, 6.9%), A23L (foods, 6.3%) and C07K (peptides, 5.1%) mark smaller, more specific delivery and chemistry branches.
Shares are the percentage of the 448 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Enamel Remineralization Actives with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about enamel remineralization actives and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in the corpus
US20170333296A1 — Fluoride composition and methods for dental mineralization
The present invention relates to compositions and methods for mineralizing a dental surface or subsurface including providing a composition including stabilized ACP and a source of fluoride ions.Filed by The University of Melbourne, published 2017-11-23. Representative of the stabilized-ACP-plus-fluoride approach that recurs across the top assignee's family.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6733818B2 | Oral care confections and method of using | 195 |
| 2 | US6846500B1 | Oral care chewing gums and method of use | 160 |
| 3 | US20080280260A1 | Method and Apparatus for Tooth Rejuvenation and Hard Tissue Modification | 114 |
| 4 | US20100272764A1 | Microencapsulated compositions and methods for tissue mineralization | 78 |
| 5 | US20070160958A1 | Method and apparatus for tooth rejuvenation and hard tissue modification | 69 |
| 6 | WO2006135982A1 | Ionic complexes | 63 |
| 7 | US20080187500A1 | Hybrid organic/inorganic chemical hybrid systems, including functionalized calcium phosphate hybrid systems, … | 42 |
| 8 | WO2006056013A1 | Stabilized calcium phosphate complexes | 42 |
| 9 | US20130011453A1 | Buffered microencapsulated compositions and methods | 41 |
| 10 | WO2006130913A1 | Dental mineralization | 39 |
Citation counts reflect influence inside the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; they are not a measure 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 data means for filing strategy
Three findings that shape where a new filing is likely to clear prior art and where it will collide with an entrenched franchise.
The claim space is already crowded at the top
Five assignees account for 286 of the 448 records in scope, with the leader alone holding 159. A new entrant working on confectionery-delivered actives or stabilized ACP chemistry is filing directly into territory covered by long-running franchises, not open ground.
Momentum has eased from its 2019 peak, not collapsed
The corpus peaked at 17 filings in 2019. The last three complete years show a modest -12% pullback rather than a steep decline, and the 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete because of publication lag.
Most filers claim cosmetic use alongside therapeutic use
Nearly six in ten records combine A61K medicinal claims with A61Q cosmetics claims, meaning a filing that stops at a therapeutic claim may be leaving a parallel cosmetic-use claim uncovered — and open to a competitor's follow-on filing.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to enamel remineralization actives, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| University of Melbourne | REYNOLDS ERIC CHARLES | 4 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | UOTSU NOBUO | 2 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | TOO KENJI | 2 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | SAKAMOTO REIICHIRO | 2 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | OKADA SHIGETAKA | 2 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | NISHIMURA TAKAHISA | 2 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | KURIKI TAKASHI | 2 |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | KIMURA TOSHIYUKI | 2 |
Co-assignee activity is thin — 10 pairs total, the strongest linking a university inventor pairing to 4 shared filings — suggesting most work in this space is filed solo rather than through joint ventures.
Who holds the claim space
A ranked field of 100 companies, with volume concentrated at the top and a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants below tenth place, where the count drops to 8.
A single assignee holds more than a third of the corpus
The top-ranked assignee's 159 records dwarf the fifth-place count of 17, indicating a franchise built over many filing years rather than a recent surge.
The mid-tier thins out quickly
Fifth place holds 17 records and tenth place only 8 — roughly half — showing that beyond the top few names, filing volume per assignee falls off fast rather than plateauing.
Even top filers show no latest-year activity
Several of the leading assignees, including the top-ranked university filer, show zero filings in the latest year with a -100% year-on-year change for at least one — consistent with the corpus-wide publication lag rather than an exit from the field.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| University of Melbourne | 0 | -100% |
| Premier Dental Products Co | 0 | — |
| Micropure Inc | 0 | — |
| Cadbury Adams USA LLC | 0 | — |
| Ezaki Glico Co Ltd | 0 | — |
| University of Western Ontario | 0 | — |
| INDIANA NANOTECH DIV OF THERAMETRIC TECH INC | 0 | — |
| Intercontinental Great Brands LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this next
The landscape points to a concentrated core and several thinner branches; the next step is testing a specific claim against that structure.
Check a draft claim against the top franchises
With 63.8% of records held by five assignees, a new filing on stabilized ACP or CPP-delivery should be checked against the leader's family before drafting independent claims.
Run a claim check in Eureka →Explore the under-claimed branches
C07K, A23G and C01B overlaps show comparatively thin coverage next to the A61K/A61Q core — worth a focused prior-art pull before committing to a specification.
Explore white space in Eureka →Watch for the 2025-2026 catch-up
Recent-year filings look low across nearly every assignee because of publication lag; re-run this view in a year to see which franchises are actually still active.
Set a monitoring alert in Eureka →Common questions on this landscape
The assignee ranking for this corpus lists 100 companies, but filing volume is heavily concentrated: the top five together hold 286 of the 448 records in scope, or 63.8%, and the single leading assignee holds 159 records on its own. That leader's position reflects a long-running filing history rather than a recent surge, since recent-year momentum data shows zero filings in the latest year for several top names, consistent with publication lag rather than an exit. Anyone assessing freedom to operate should start with the leader's family before looking at the rest of the ranked field.
Filing activity peaked at 17 records in 2019 and has eased since, with the last three complete years (2021 to 2024) showing a -12% change from 17 down to 15 filings. That is a modest pullback, not a collapse, and it should not be read from the 2025-2026 figures, which are still incomplete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months. A fairer read is that the field has settled into a steadier filing pace after its 2019 high rather than accelerating or disappearing.
Medicinal preparation claims under IPC class A61K appear in 89.7% of the 448 records, and cosmetics-use claims under A61Q appear in 57.1%, meaning most filings pair a therapeutic claim with a cosmetic-use claim in the same family. Smaller but recurring branches include A61P therapeutic-activity claims (25.9%), dentistry-specific claims under A61C (7.6%), and confectionery or food delivery formats under A23G and A23L (6.9% and 6.3%). Because a single record can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should be read as overlapping coverage, not a strict breakdown.
The thinner IPC branches relative to the A61K/A61Q core include C07K peptide and protein claims at 5.1% of records, C01B inorganic compound claims at 6.9%, and A61C dentistry-device-integrated claims at 7.6%. These lower-density branches suggest under-claimed intersections — for example, peptide-stabilized calcium phosphate carriers or device-integrated delivery systems — where a well-drafted claim is less likely to run into the dense prior art that dominates the core A61K/A61Q space. Co-assignee collaboration is also thin, with only 10 pairs recorded across the whole corpus, indicating most white-space opportunities have not yet been jointly staked out.
US20170333296A1, filed by The University of Melbourne and published in November 2017, claims compositions and methods for mineralizing a dental surface using stabilized amorphous calcium phosphate (ACP) combined with a source of fluoride ions. It is representative of the top assignee's broader family strategy of pairing stabilized ACP chemistry with fluoride co-delivery, a combination that recurs across that assignee's other filings. Because the same assignee holds 159 records in this corpus, a filing that overlaps this stabilized-ACP-plus-fluoride approach should be checked closely against this family before drafting independent claims.
Research Enamel Remineralization Actives in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole enamel remineralization actives 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.