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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (329 records) with 2024 (324) — 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 4,250 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
GalNAc conjugation is the dominant chemistry for routing oligonucleotide therapeutics into hepatocytes via the asialoglycoprotein receptor, and the claim space built around it now extends well beyond liver targeting. This landscape tracks 4,250 records published between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off that combine GalNAc- or ASGPR-related delivery language with claims on receptor-mediated uptake, ligand valency, endosomal escape, tissue selectivity, conjugation chemistry or productive uptake — the mechanistic vocabulary that separates a working conjugate from an inert one.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent filing years understate real activity; read the trend through 2024, the last year with a complete window, rather than the partial tail after it.
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Two views of the same 4,250-record corpus: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filings rose from 135 in 2017 to a peak of 362 in 2022, then held roughly flat — 329 in 2021 versus 324 in 2024, a -2% change across that span. The 2025–2026 figures are still filling in under the publication lag and should not be read as a decline.
A61K (medicinal preparations) and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) between them cover the large majority of records — 76.2% and 60.4% respectively — with A61P, C07K and C07H forming a secondary tier. Records can carry multiple classes, so these shares sum past 100%; the useful signal is where the field's claim density concentrates, not a clean split.
Shares are the percentage of the 4,250 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about galnac and extrahepatic conjugation and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe application claims a conjugate linking a saponin to an ASGPR-targeting ligand containing at least one GalNAc moiety, with an oligonucleotide covalently attached to both the saponin and the ASGPR ligand, plus pharmaceutical compositions built on that conjugate and their use in treating conditions tied to genes including apoB, TTR and PCSK9.Filed by Sapreme Technologies B.V., published 2024-09-19 — illustrative of a second wave of filings that pair GalNAc targeting with endosomal-escape enhancers rather than claiming the sugar ligand alone.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US8106022B2 | Carbohydrate conjugates as delivery agents for oligonucleotides | 1,093 |
| 2 | WO2014179620A1 | Conjugated antisense compounds and their use | 931 |
| 3 | WO2009073809A2 | Carbohydrate conjugates as delivery agents for oligonucleotides | 750 |
| 4 | WO2013151666A2 | Modified polynucleotides for the production of biologics and proteins associated with human disease | 748 |
| 5 | WO2013090648A1 | Modified nucleoside, nucleotide, and nucleic acid compositions | 687 |
| 6 | WO2009126933A2 | Site-specific delivery of nucleic acids by combining targeting ligands with endosomolytic components | 609 |
| 7 | US6008336A | Compacted nucleic acids and their delivery to cells | 578 |
| 8 | US20130245107A1 | Dlin-MC3-DMA lipid nanoparticle delivery of modified polynucleotides | 523 |
| 9 | US6077835A | Delivery of compacted nucleic acid to cells | 522 |
| 10 | WO2013151671A1 | Modified polynucleotides for the production of cosmetic proteins and peptides | 516 |
Citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older filings by construction — treat this table as a map of influence on the field to date, not a ranking of current commercial importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three read-throughs from the filing pattern, the citation table and the technology composition together.
The top five assignees account for 1,363 of the 4,250 records in scope, and the top ten push that to 43.9%. That leaves a long tail of the remaining ranked assignees each holding a much smaller slice — worth checking individually before assuming freedom to operate.
Volume roughly held steady between 2021 and 2024 (-2%) after peaking at 362 in 2022. That pattern is consistent with a field where the core delivery chemistry is settled and new filings are increasingly about refinements — valency, linker chemistry, escape mechanisms — rather than the base conjugate.
A61K and C12N together cover most of the corpus, meaning composition-of-matter and genetic-engineering claims are the densest ground. C07H (sugars and nucleic acids) sits at 15.9% — lighter coverage relative to the conjugate chemistry it enables, and a subclass worth checking closely before filing there.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to galnac and extrahepatic conjugation, with the prior art for and against each one.
The ranked list spans 100 assignees; a handful of large pharmaceutical and biotech filers sit well ahead of a long tail of single-digit entrants, including university and specialty-conjugate players.
The leading assignee's count is more than four times the tenth-place figure of 90, a gap wide enough that its granted claims are the first thing to clear before designing a new GalNAc conjugate.
Recent-year filing changes vary sharply by assignee — one smaller filer grew filings in the latest year while several established names dropped sharply or filed nothing, a pattern consistent with the publication lag rather than a real pullback for the largest players.
Only ten co-assignee pairings appear in the corpus, and the strongest of them links one company to a university partner far more often than any other pairing — a sign that most of the field files solo rather than through joint ventures.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Wave Life Sciences Ltd | 5 | +25% |
| Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 2 | -60% |
| Orna Therapeutics, Inc. | 2 | -87% |
| Sapreme Technologies B.V. | 2 | -75% |
| ModernaTX, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Moderna Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| PhaseRx, Inc. | 0 | — |
| University of Washington | 0 | — |
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions rather than a single conclusion.
With one assignee holding 522 records against a tenth-place figure of 90, any new conjugate design should start with a freedom-to-operate check against that portfolio specifically, not the field average.
Explore assignee portfolios in EurekaC07H, C12P and C07C carry noticeably less filing density than A61K and C12N. That is where a well-drafted claim has more room, provided the underlying chemistry is genuinely novel.
Run a white-space search in EurekaLatest-year filing changes swing sharply by assignee. Re-checking momentum every publication cycle, rather than relying on a single snapshot, avoids reading a temporary lag as a real slowdown.
Set up monitoring in EurekaThe most-cited record in this corpus, US8106022B2, covers carbohydrate conjugates as delivery agents for oligonucleotides and has been cited 1,093 times, making it the closest thing to a foundational reference in the field. A related family, WO2009073809A2, covers the same subject matter and carries 750 citations. Both sit among a small group of highly cited filings that any new entrant's freedom-to-operate review should check first, since later conjugate patents tend to build on the linker and ligand chemistry these establish.
Filing volume peaked at 362 in 2022 and has since roughly held steady rather than kept climbing — 2021's 329 filings compare to 324 in 2024, a -2% change over that span, which is the last window with complete publication data. Figures for 2025 and 2026 in the raw trend look lower still, but that reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than an actual drop-off. Treat the field as mature and steady rather than either booming or shrinking.
Fairly concentrated at the top: the five leading assignees together hold 1,363 of the 4,250 records in scope, or 32.1%, and the top ten extend that to 43.9%. Below that the ranking of 100 assignees thins out quickly into single- and double-digit filers, including university groups and specialty-conjugate startups. A new entrant should expect to negotiate around or design around the leader's estate specifically, since it alone accounts for far more records than the next several competitors combined.
Standard GalNAc conjugation relies on the asialoglycoprotein receptor, which is highly expressed on hepatocytes, so the chemistry is inherently liver-biased. Extrahepatic delivery claims in this corpus address the harder problem of routing the same or related conjugates to tissues outside the liver, which typically requires different targeting ligands, altered valency, or conjugation chemistry tuned for a different receptor or uptake mechanism. This is one of the lighter-filed branches relative to the core hepatocyte-targeting claims, based on the IPC composition in this dataset.
The basic GalNAc-ASGPR targeting chemistry is well covered by early, heavily cited filings, so more recent applications — such as US20240307545A1's saponin-oligonucleotide-GalNAc conjugate — tend to claim additional functional elements layered on top, like escape-enhancing moieties or specific linker architectures. These second-wave claims are narrower and mechanism-specific rather than covering the ligand itself. Reviewing what a specific claim actually recites, rather than assuming a general GalNAc patent blocks it, is the practical way to assess exposure here.
Go past this page: query the whole galnac and extrahepatic conjugation 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.
Help us improve
Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.
This page