Hypoimmune Stem Cell Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
Hypoimmune and gene-edited stem cell patents: mapping the universal donor cell race
One assignee, CRISPR Therapeutics, holds 140 of the 411 records in scope while fifth place sits at 20 and tenth place at 6 — a steep drop-off after the leader rather than an even spread. Filings rose from 18 in 2017 to a peak of 88 in 2023, then declined to 42 by 2024 — a 43% fall from the 2021 level of 74. That is the last complete year in the series; 2025 and 2026 figures will continue to rise as publications catch up with filing dates, so they should not yet be read as a continued slide.
- 1TSCAN THERAPEUTICS INC140
- 2CRISPR THERAPEUTICS AG118
- 3SANA BIOTECHNOLOGY INC80
- 4DANA FARBER CANCER INSTITUTE INC23
- 5FRED HUTCHINSON CANCER CENT20
See the full hypoimmune and gene edited stem cells analysis in Eureka
- The complete ranking, not just the top five
- Every IPC branch with its share of the corpus
- The most-cited records, and where claim space is still thin
Common questions about this landscape
Who holds the most patents on hypoimmune and gene-edited stem cells?
CRISPR Therapeutics is the clear leader in this dataset, holding 140 of the 411 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 20 records and the tenth at 6. Sana Biotechnology, Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Fred Hutchinson Cancer Center and several university systems make up the rest of the ranked field of 31 companies. The gap between first and second place is wide enough that a freedom-to-operate review in this space should start with the leader’s family before looking at anyone else.
Is filing activity in hypoimmune cell technology still growing?
Filings peaked at 88 in 2023 and fell to 42 by 2024, a 43% drop from the 2021 level of 74 — the last three-year span complete enough to draw a conclusion from. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are still filling in because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so it is too early to call this a sustained decline rather than a post-peak correction. Anyone using this trend for planning should treat 2024 as the most recent reliable data point.
What technical areas are under-claimed in this field?
Testing and quality-control methods trail the core construct claims by a wide margin: G01N material analysis and testing appears in 26.0% of the 411 records and C12Q enzyme/DNA measurement in just 6.6%, compared with over 70% for the core editing and formulation classes. Specific sub-areas worth checking include tumorigenicity testing protocols, clonality assessment methods, and off-target editing detection assays. These are named in the search scope itself, meaning they are technically relevant to the field but comparatively thin in claim coverage so far.
Disclaimer. This analysis is based on Patsnap Eureka data drawn from a limited snapshot of global patent records and is provided for general information and reference only. Patent data carries inherent limitations — recent filings are under-counted because of publication lag, counts may be on a record or family basis, classification and applicant-name data may contain errors or duplicates, and the underlying search query defines the scope shown — so the analysis may be incomplete or inaccurate and may not reflect the full technology landscape.
Nothing here is an exhaustive prior-art, novelty, freedom-to-operate or validity search, nor does it constitute legal, financial or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. Verify independently and review with qualified patent and legal professionals before acting on it.
Method: Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Hypoimmune and Gene Edited Stem Cells covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish. Every share divides by all records in scope. Data: Patsnap Eureka. See the full landscape report.