Insulin Pump Drug Delivery Patent Landscape 2026
- 138 filings in 2017, the peak year so far, versus 108 at the 2022 midpoint — the field has plateaued rather than kept accelerating.
- A61M carries 1,494 of 1,499 records, but G16H healthcare informatics already touches 798 — control software is where the newer claim activity sits.
- Only 10 co-assignee pairs exist across 1,499 families, and the strongest links pair device makers with university labs, not with each other.
Filing growth compares 2021 (128 records) with 2024 (99) — 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 1,499 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks patent families filed against insulin pump, insulin delivery and artificial pancreas terminology, narrowed to claims naming insulin delivery, closed-loop delivery, micro-dosing or basal-bolus control, and classified under the core infusion-hardware IPC codes A61M5/142, A61M5/172 and A61M5/168. The dataset spans filings from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off and covers 1,499 patent families, giving a family-level rather than raw-document view of where claim space is occupied.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025-2026 figures in any trend chart are undercounts that will keep filling in as later filings publish; treat the most recent one to two years as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology mix
Two views of the same 1,499-family dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
Filings rose to a 2017 peak, then flattened
Annual filings climbed to 138 in 2017 and have not exceeded that since; 2022 sits at 108, roughly midway down from the peak, which points to a maturing rather than expanding filing pattern. The final one to two years understate true activity because of publication lag, but the multi-year plateau predates that effect.
Hardware dominates, but informatics is close behind
A61M (body-fluid devices) appears in 1,494 of 1,499 records, confirming this is fundamentally an infusion-hardware dataset. G16H (healthcare informatics, 798) and A61B (diagnosis and surgery, 679) are the next-heaviest classes, well ahead of G06F (272) and A61K (155) — evidence that dosing logic and monitoring integration are claimed almost as densely as the pump mechanics themselves.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,499 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Insulin Pump Drug Delivery with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about insulin pump drug delivery and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited prior art in this space
Insulin delivery methods, systems and devices
Methods of insulin delivery may include obtaining one or more blood glucose readings from a flash glucose monitor, where the blood glucose readings may be obtained in response to a user invocation of the flash glucose monitor. The method may also include generating multiple insulin delivery profiles of insulin delivery actions over multiple diurnal time segments based on the one or more blood glucose readings. The method may additionally include selecting one of the delivery profiles that is projected to approximate a target blood glucose level, and delivering insulin according to the selected delivery profile. Systems may provide such insulin delivery.Filed by Insulet Corporation; granted 2020-04-07.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20030212379A1 | Systems and methods for remotely controlling medication infusion and analyte monitoring | 1,387 |
| 2 | US6852104B2 | Programmable insulin pump | 958 |
| 3 | US4435173A | Variable rate syringe pump for insulin delivery | 739 |
| 4 | US9980140B1 | Secure communication architecture for medical devices | 564 |
| 5 | US20040204744A1 | Apparatus and methods using acoustic telemetry for intrabody communications | 533 |
| 6 | US6744350B2 | Insulin pump having missed meal bolus alarm | 520 |
| 7 | US7651845B2 | Method and apparatus for glucose control and insulin dosing for diabetics | 512 |
| 8 | US20050272640A1 | Method and apparatus for glucose control and insulin dosing for diabetics | 508 |
| 9 | EP1338295A1 | Systems for remotely controlling medication infusion and analyte monitoring | 493 |
| 10 | US4822337A | Insulin delivery method and apparatus | 466 |
Citation counts are drawn from within this searched corpus and skew toward older filings by construction — read them as markers of foundational influence, not of current commercial relevance.
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 say about where this field is headed
Reading the filing trend, IPC mix and co-assignee data together points to a field with settled hardware claims and more open activity in software-adjacent classes.
Growth has flattened, not accelerated
The peak year of 138 filings in 2017 has not been matched since, and by the 2022 midpoint annual volume had already dropped to 108. That is a declining or flat trajectory over the observed window, not a technology still in its filing ramp.
Informatics claims sit alongside hardware, not behind it
G16H healthcare informatics appears in over half of all records, second only to the core A61M infusion class. Claims are increasingly written to cover the dosing algorithm and data pipeline around the pump, not just the mechanical delivery path.
Filing is overwhelmingly solo
Only 10 co-assignee pairs exist across the entire corpus. The strongest pairings link device manufacturers to university research groups rather than to other companies, suggesting most IP is built and held in-house.
Recent-year filing counts are thin across the board
Named assignees in the latest-year momentum data show single-digit filing counts, several down sharply year over year. This is consistent with the broader plateau, though the newest year is also the most affected by publication lag.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to insulin pump drug delivery, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd | Roche Diagnostics GmbH | 13 |
| The Regents of the University of California | President and Fellows of Harvard College | 10 |
| Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. | Cambridge Enterprise Limited | 6 |
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd | Roche Diabetes Care, Inc. | 6 |
| Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. | BUDIMAN ERWIN S | 3 |
| The Regents of the University of California | SANSUM DIABETES RES INST | 3 |
| Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc. | Insulet Corporation | 2 |
| University of Virginia Patent Foundation | PRYOR ELLIOTT CARROLL | 2 |
The strongest documented links pair device makers with academic patent offices (The Regents of the University of California + President and Fellows of Harvard College) or with diagnostics partners (F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd + Roche Diagnostics GmbH), rather than between competing device companies.
Who holds the claims, and where they are still filing
Assignee ranking in this corpus concentrates at the top, with a long tail of single-filing entrants behind the named device makers, diagnostics firms and university patent offices.
Leading recent filer, still declining
Insulet Corporation recorded the highest latest-year filing count among tracked assignees at 3, but that is down 82% year over year, consistent with the corpus-wide plateau rather than a company-specific slowdown.
Flat rather than falling
Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc. held its latest-year count flat at 0% YoY, one of the few names in the momentum data not showing a decline, though the absolute volume is a single filing.
The strongest co-assignee pair in the dataset
This pairing between a Roche-affiliated entity and a diagnostics device arm produced the densest co-filing relationship tracked, ahead of the university-paired collaborations, suggesting integrated sensor-and-pump programmes are jointly claimed rather than licensed in.
US filings dominate the receiving-office mix
The United States accounts for 761 of the tracked filings, more than triple the next-largest office (EPO at 216), meaning most enforceable priority and litigation exposure in this space runs through US practice.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Insulet Corporation | 3 | -82% |
| Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc. | 1 | 0% |
| Medtronic MiniMed, Inc. | 1 | -75% |
| University of Virginia Patent Foundation | 1 | -86% |
| Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. | 1 | — |
| Tandem Diabetes Care, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Animas Corporation | 0 | — |
| Dexcom, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this
The filing plateau and the software-adjacent IPC growth both point to the same next step: pressure-testing where new claims can still be written cleanly.
Map the informatics overlap
With 798 records touching G16H, any new dosing-algorithm filing needs a freedom-to-operate check that spans A61M and G16H together, not A61M alone.
Explore IPC overlap in Eureka →Watch the momentum leaders, not just the citation leaders
The most-cited patents are a decade or more old; the assignees still filing in the latest year, even at reduced volume, are the better signal of where near-term contest will happen.
Track assignee momentum in Eureka →Stress-test the white space chips
Under-claimed sub-areas like sensor-dropout handoff logic sit next to dense prior art; a first claim there should be scoped against the nearest A61M/G16H combination before drafting.
Run a white space search in Eureka →Frequently asked questions
This dataset tracks 1,499 patent families filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off, using a search that combines insulin pump, insulin delivery and artificial pancreas terminology with the core infusion-hardware IPC codes A61M5/142, A61M5/172 and A61M5/168. Family counts are the fairer unit here because they neutralise continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplicates of the same invention. The true figure for the most recent one to two years will rise further as filings still in the publication pipeline become visible.
No, filing activity peaked at 138 in 2017 and has not returned to that level since, with the 2022 midpoint sitting at 108. That is a flat-to-declining trajectory across the observed window rather than continued growth. The final couple of years in any chart understate true filing volume because of an approximate 18-month publication lag, but the multi-year plateau shown here predates that effect and is unlikely to be explained away by it alone.
A61M (devices for body fluids) is the anchor class, appearing in 1,494 of 1,499 records, confirming this is primarily an infusion-hardware dataset. G16H healthcare informatics is a close second at 798 records, followed by A61B diagnosis and surgery at 679, meaning dosing algorithms and monitoring integration are claimed almost as heavily as the physical pump mechanism. G06F, A61K, G01N, G16Z and G05B trail well behind and represent narrower, more specific claim territory.
US10610644B2, assigned to Insulet Corporation and granted 2020-04-07, covers methods of generating multiple insulin delivery profiles across diurnal time segments from flash glucose monitor readings and selecting the profile projected to approximate a target blood glucose level. It sits inside the dense A61M/G16H overlap this landscape identifies, meaning any new filing on profile-based basal-bolus adjustment triggered by on-demand glucose readings needs a specific freedom-to-operate check against it. It is a representative record for the corpus, not necessarily the single most-cited one — the citation table lists older foundational patents separately.
Based on the IPC composition and co-assignee data, the least-crowded adjacent territory sits in specific failure-mode and multi-signal handling rather than in the core delivery mechanism: things like basal-bolus handoff logic during sensor dropout, micro-dosing calibration under motion artefact, and multi-hormone closed-loop coordination. These sit next to, but are not identical with, the heavily claimed A61M and G16H core, so a first filing there should be scoped narrowly against the nearest existing combination claim rather than assumed to be open ground.
Research Insulin Pump Drug Delivery in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole insulin pump drug delivery 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.