Fc-Fusion Protein Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 18 families from the leading filer versus 8 at fifth place — a steep drop-off rather than an even spread across the 16 ranked assignees.
- Filings peaked at 13 in 2017 and cooled to 1 by 2024 (-67% from 2021's 3) — recent years are still filling in under the ~18-month publication lag, so treat this as a plateau, not a verdict.
- C12P fermentation/enzymatic-synthesis claims sit on only 19.2% of the 78 records — most of the crowd is in C07K/C12N genetic-engineering claims, leaving process-scale fermentation comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 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 dataset tracks patent families addressing Fc-fusion protein production and manufacturing — the process side of the field, not therapeutic use. The search combines Fc-fusion and recombinant-protein-production language with C12P21/08, C07K16/00 and C12N15/62 classifications, and excludes records framed around patient treatment, diagnostic imaging or in vivo administration. The result is 78 published records spanning filings from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off.
Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures in any trend chart are undercounts by construction, not evidence of a slowdown. The most defensible read of momentum stops at 2024, the last year treated here as complete.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 78-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A 2017 peak followed by a multi-year pullback
Filings hit 13 in 2017, the peak across the window. By 2021 the annual count had fallen to 3, and by 2024 — the last complete year — to 1, a -67% move over that span. Read the 2025-2026 bars as incomplete rather than as a continuation of the decline.
Claim density concentrates in two subclasses
Every one of the 78 records in scope carries a C07K peptide/protein classification, and 96.2% also carry C12N genetic-engineering codes — the two subclasses effectively co-occur across this corpus. A61K medicinal-preparation codes appear on 67.9% of records and A61P therapeutic-activity codes on 61.5%, reflecting the therapeutic framing of most Fc-fusion filings even where the claims are process-oriented. C12P fermentation and enzymatic-synthesis codes sit at just 19.2%, and C07H sugars/nucleic-acids codes at 1.3% — both comparatively thin given how central fermentation-scale production is to actually manufacturing these molecules.
Shares are the percentage of the 78 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Fusion Protein Manufacturing — Fc-Fusion Protein Production Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about fusion protein manufacturing — fc-fusion protein production patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records other filings build on
US20170321194A1 — Modulation of lipid metabolism for protein production
The present disclosure features methods and compositions for modulating lipid metabolism to achieve improved production and quality of recombinant products, such as next generation biologics. Modulation of lipid metabolism as described herein includes, for example, introducing a lipid metabolism modulator described herein to a cell or a cell-free system. Also encompassed by the present disclosure are engineered cells with improved production capacity and improved product quality, methods for engineering such cells, and preparations and mixtures comprising the products from such cells.Filed by Lonza, published 2017-11-09 — a cell-engineering route to production yield rather than a molecule composition claim.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2014094122A1 | Treatment of CD47+ disease cells with SIRP alpha-fc fusions | 203 |
| 2 | WO2008154226A1 | Natriuretic fusion proteins | 86 |
| 3 | US20100310561A1 | Natriuretic fusion proteins | 66 |
| 4 | US20120093814A1 | Fusion Proteins Comprising Canine FC Portions | 34 |
| 5 | US20150210749A1 | Methods of treatment using fusion proteins | 16 |
| 6 | KR100982170B1 | Composition for the Anti―Cancer metastasis containing ＤＬＫ１―Ｆｃ fusion protein as an effective ingredient | 16 |
| 7 | US20180201664A1 | APOA-1 fusion polypeptides and related compositions and methods | 10 |
| 8 | WO2018136163A2 | Tandem APOA-1 fusion polypeptides | 9 |
| 9 | EP2931752B1 | Treatment of CD47+ disease cells with SIRP alpha-fc fusions | 8 |
| 10 | EP3575326A1 | Treatment of CD47+ disease cells with SIRP alpha-fc fusions | 6 |
Citation counts favor older, longer-indexed records within this searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on the field's vocabulary, not as a ranking 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 a filing decision
Three read-throughs from the trend, the IPC mix, and the citation table.
The pullback predates the publication lag, but don't over-read the tail
Filings fell from 3 in 2021 to 1 in 2024, the last year this dataset treats as complete. That's a real three-year contraction, not an artifact of the ~18-month gap between filing and publication — but the 2025-2026 bars sitting near zero are exactly the years still filling in, so they shouldn't be added to the story yet.
Peptide and genetic-engineering claims are the default, not a differentiator
Every record in scope touches C07K, and nearly all touch C12N. Filing a straightforward Fc-fusion composition or expression-vector claim in this pairing means competing against the full weight of the corpus; the differentiation has to come from a narrower functional or process limitation.
The most-cited filings set vocabulary for CD47 and natriuretic fusion constructs
The highest-cited record concerns SIRP alpha-Fc fusion targeting CD47+ cells; two of the next most-cited both cover natriuretic fusion proteins. New filings referencing these constructs are working in well-mapped territory — the citation weight signals where examiners and competitors will look for prior art first.
Fermentation-scale process claims are thin relative to molecule claims
Only 15 of the 78 records carry a C12P fermentation or enzymatic-synthesis code, even though scaling Fc-fusion production ultimately runs through fermentation and purification steps. That gap is where the representative Lonza filing sits, and it's underpopulated relative to the crowded C07K/C12N molecule-level claim space.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to fusion protein manufacturing — fc-fusion protein production patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who's filing, and where the field is still open
The ranking includes every assignee the data endpoint returns for this search — 16 companies, counted in patent records — not a top-50 or top-100 cut.
A clear leader, then a steep drop to a long tail
The leading assignee holds 18 records against 8 at fifth place and 1 at tenth — a much steeper drop-off than an even distribution across 16 ranked companies would produce. Co-assignee pairings, including a 5-record link between two related entities, suggest some of this concentration reflects corporate structure (parent/subsidiary or spun-off IP holding vehicles) rather than sixteen fully independent filing programs.
Momentum has gone quiet across the board, not just at the leader
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum, including the leader and its closest co-filers, shows zero filings in the latest year, with one showing a -100% year-on-year change. Given the publication lag, this reads as a data-currency gap rather than proof the field has gone cold — but it does mean no single company is visibly pulling ahead right now.
US and Israeli filings lead, with a secondary EPO/Australia/Canada tier
The United States and Israel are the top two receiving offices, followed by a closely grouped tier of EPO, Australia and Canada filings, plus a smaller WIPO/PCT count. That spread suggests applicants are pursuing US and Israeli protection first and adding broader international coverage selectively rather than defaulting to PCT.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Trillium Therapeutics Inc. | 0 | — |
| Lonza AG | 0 | — |
| Theripion Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Pfizer Inc. | 0 | — |
| PF ARGENTUM IP HOLDINGS LLC | 0 | — |
| Boehringer Ingelheim International GmbH | 0 | — |
| Syntonix Pharmaceuticals Inc. | 0 | — |
| TRILLIUM THERAPEUTICS ULC | 0 | — |
Where to take this
Two directions depending on whether you're scoping freedom-to-operate or looking for a filing gap.
Map the fermentation and purification white space in detail
With only 19.2% of records carrying C12P codes, a closer look at exactly which fermentation and purification steps are claimed — and by whom — can surface a narrower filing position than competing directly on Fc-fusion composition claims.
Explore this landscape in EurekaCheck freedom-to-operate against the most-cited constructs
The CD47/SIRP-alpha and natriuretic fusion protein filings carry the heaviest citation weight in this corpus. Any new Fc-fusion program targeting adjacent indications should clear these specifically before assuming a clean path.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaCommon questions on Fc-fusion protein production patents
Among the 16 assignees in this ranked dataset, one company leads with 18 patent families, well ahead of the fifth-placed filer at 8 and the tenth at 1. Co-assignee links between the leader and a related IP-holding entity account for some of that concentration, suggesting corporate restructuring or spin-out activity rather than a single unified filing strategy. Because this is the full ranking the dataset returns rather than a top-50 or top-100 cut, the drop-off from leader to long tail is a genuine feature of the field, not a sampling artifact.
Filings peaked at 13 in 2017 and declined to 1 by 2024, a -67% change from the 3 filed in 2021 — the last three-year span this dataset treats as complete. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the near-zero counts shown for 2025 and 2026 are undercounts still filling in, not proof of continued decline. The safest read is a plateau at a lower filing rate since the 2017 peak, not a field in active retreat.
This landscape is built around IPC classes C12P21/08 (peptide fermentation), C07K16/00 (immunoglobulins) and C12N15/62 (fusion polypeptides), combined with production and manufacturing search terms. Within the resulting 78 records, C07K appears on all of them and C12N on 96.2%, meaning the two effectively co-occur across the corpus. C12P fermentation/enzymatic-synthesis codes are comparatively rare at 19.2% of records, which is notable given that fermentation-scale process steps are central to actually manufacturing these proteins at commercial volume.
The clearest gap sits in fermentation and downstream purification process claims: only 15 of the 78 records carry a C12P code, versus near-universal coverage of C07K peptide and C12N genetic-engineering claims. Cell-free synthesis approaches and lipid-metabolism-modulated host engineering — the approach behind the representative Lonza filing in this dataset — also sit outside the densest claim clusters. A first claim in these areas would need to tie a specific process parameter or host modification to a measurable yield or quality outcome, rather than claiming the fusion molecule itself.
US20170321194A1, assigned to Lonza and published 2017-11-09, covers methods and compositions for modulating lipid metabolism in host cells or cell-free systems to improve recombinant protein production yield and quality. It blocks approaches that introduce a lipid metabolism modulator to achieve those specific improvements, and covers the resulting engineered cells and their preparations. It does not claim the Fc-fusion molecule itself or fermentation conditions generally, so competitors working on other production-yield levers, or on purification and formulation steps downstream of cell engineering, sit outside its claim scope.
Research Fusion Protein Manufacturing — Fc-Fusion Protein Production Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole fusion protein manufacturing — fc-fusion protein production 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.