Insulin Pump System Integration Patents: Leaders & White Space 2026
- Filing has cooled since its 2017 peak of 45. By the most recent year activity had fallen to single digits, with the 2022 midpoint at only 13 — a pattern of consolidation, not fresh land-grab.
- Healthcare informatics claims now outnumber pure delivery-device claims. G16H appears in 165 records against 162 for A61M, showing the fight has moved from the pump hardware to the software and dosing-logic layer.
- One inventor pairing anchors the closed-loop core. Mazlish and Desborough co-appear on four families, the densest collaboration signal in a field where most co-assignee pairs share only two or three filings.
Filing growth compares 2021 (18 records) with 2024 (20) — 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 211 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this patent set actually covers
This landscape tracks 211 patent families filed against pump-CGM-controller integration, hybrid closed-loop control and artificial-pancreas architectures, drawn from titles, abstracts and claims text under IPC classes A61M5/172, A61B5/00 and G16H20/17. It is narrower than insulin pump patents broadly: the search string requires system-integration language, not just a delivery device or a sensor on its own. That filter is what separates a standalone pump claim from a claim that ties glucose sensing, dosing logic and a controller into one governed loop.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, so the final year or two of filings will read low simply because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months. Read the recent-year figures as a floor, not a ceiling.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 211 families: when the claims were filed, and which IPC subclasses they sit under. Both point to a field that expanded fast around 2017 and has since settled into incremental filing around an established core.
A 2017 peak followed by a steady decline
Filings ran from 45 in 2017 down toward single digits by the most recent full year, with 2022 sitting at 13 — the midpoint of a downward slope rather than a plateau. That shape usually means the foundational architecture claims are already staked out and later filers are patching specific mechanisms onto them.
Informatics and delivery devices dominate, control theory barely registers
G16H (healthcare informatics) and A61M (body-fluid delivery devices) each appear in roughly three-quarters of records, with A61B (diagnosis and monitoring) close behind. G05B (control and regulating systems) and image-recognition classes each show up in only a handful of records, which is notable given how central control-loop tuning is to a hybrid closed-loop system.
Shares are the percentage of the 211 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Insulin Pump System Integration with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about insulin pump system integration and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records other applicants cite most
US10610644B2 — 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.Granted to Insulet Corporation; filed within the same wave as the five most-cited records in this set.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20180200434A1 | System and method for adjusting insulin delivery | 113 |
| 2 | US20180200441A1 | Insulin delivery methods, systems and devices | 112 |
| 3 | US20180369479A1 | Artificial Pancreas Integrated CGM Architectures and Designs | 108 |
| 4 | US20200101223A1 | Insulin infusion device with configurable target blood glucose value for automatic basal insulin delivery ope… | 103 |
| 5 | US20180200438A1 | System and method for adjusting insulin delivery | 101 |
| 6 | US20110257627A1 | Substance monitoring and control in human or animal bodies | 96 |
| 7 | US20170332952A1 | Insulin delivery system and methods with risk based set points | 90 |
| 8 | WO2015056259A1 | System and method for improved artificial pancreas management | 86 |
| 9 | US10583250B2 | System and method for adjusting insulin delivery | 79 |
| 10 | US20170203038A1 | Adjusting insulin delivery rates | 65 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and skew toward older records — a 2018 filing has had years longer to accumulate citations than a 2024 one.
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 filing pattern says about the field
Four read-throughs from the trend, the IPC split and the collaboration graph, aimed at where to look next rather than at restating the counts.
The land-grab phase is over
Filing activity peaked in 2017 and has declined in most years since, with the 2022 midpoint at 13. New entrants now have to design around an occupied core rather than stake fresh claims on the basic pump-CGM-controller loop.
Software claims have caught up with hardware claims
Healthcare informatics (G16H) now appears in slightly more records than the delivery-device class (A61M) that historically defined this space, indicating the dosing algorithm and data layer is where new differentiation is being claimed.
Control-loop tuning is thinly claimed
Only a handful of records touch G05B control and regulating systems directly, despite control-loop stability being central to any hybrid closed-loop product. That gap sits between the informatics and delivery-device claim clusters.
Inventor pairings concentrate around a small core
The Mazlish–Desborough pairing anchors four families, more than any of the ten identified co-assignee pairs. Most other pairs, including several French research-institute combinations, share only two or three filings apiece.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to insulin pump system integration, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee activity and where the momentum has gone quiet
Recent-year filing counts are thin across the board, which is consistent with a field past its filing peak rather than one still ramping. A few assignees still show a pulse; most of the historically active names show none in the latest year.
Insulet Corporation (Insulet) still filing, but down sharply
Insulet posted two filings in the latest year, a 71% drop year-on-year. It remains one of the only assignees with any recorded activity in the most recent period.
University of Virginia Patent Foundation keeps a foothold
The University of Virginia Patent Foundation, long associated with closed-loop control research, logged a single filing in the latest year — modest, but notable given most historically active corporate assignees show zero.
Historically active names show no recent filings
Medtronic MiniMed, Cambridge Enterprise and Bigfoot Biomedical all show zero filings in the latest year in this dataset, consistent with the overall decline from the 2017 peak rather than a company-specific pullback.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Insulet Corporation | 2 | -71% |
| University of Virginia Patent Foundation | 1 | — |
| Abbott Diabetes Care Inc. | 1 | — |
| Bigfoot Biomedical, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Medtronic MiniMed, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Cambridge Enterprise Limited | 0 | — |
| MAZLISH BRYAN | 0 | — |
| DESBOROUGH LANE | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The counts and rankings here are a starting point for freedom-to-operate and whitespace work, not a substitute for claim-level review.
Map claims against the informatics gap
With G16H now ahead of A61M, a claim-by-claim review of the informatics-layer filings is likely more useful than another pass over pump hardware.
Explore in EurekaCheck control-loop claims for design-around room
The thin G05B overlap suggests control-tuning claims may not be as tightly held as the delivery-device core — worth verifying before assuming freedom to operate.
Run a claim search in EurekaTrack the quiet assignees
Zero recent filings from several historically dominant names could mean a strategy shift, an acquisition, or simply a mature portfolio — worth confirming before treating them as inactive.
Set up monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on insulin pump system integration patents
In this dataset it means a filing whose title, abstract or claims explicitly cover the integration of an insulin pump with a continuous glucose monitor and a controller into a governed closed-loop or hybrid closed-loop system, not just a standalone pump or sensor. The search targets IPC classes A61M5/172 (infusion pump hardware), A61B5/00 (diagnostic and monitoring methods) and G16H20/17 (health informatics for treatment delivery) together with system-integration language in the text. A pump patent that never mentions the sensor-controller loop would not qualify. This distinction matters because a freedom-to-operate search on 'insulin pump patents' alone would miss the informatics-layer claims that increasingly define this space.
The ranking in this dataset is dominated by a small group of device makers and academic technology-transfer offices, with Insulet showing the most recent-year activity of the group tracked here, albeit down sharply year-on-year. Several other historically prominent assignees, including Medtronic MiniMed, Cambridge Enterprise and Bigfoot Biomedical, show no filings in the latest year. That does not mean they have exited the space; publication lag and portfolio strategy can both suppress recent-year counts. Anyone doing competitive tracking should treat the current ranking as a snapshot, not a live leaderboard, and re-check after each publication cycle.
Filings peaked at 45 in 2017 and dropped toward single digits by the most recent year, with 2022 sitting at a midpoint of 13. A decline of this shape typically signals that the foundational architecture — the basic pump-CGM-controller loop and hybrid closed-loop control logic — is already well claimed, so later filers are patching narrower mechanisms onto an established core rather than staking new ground. It can also reflect industry consolidation, since fewer independent companies means fewer independent filing strategies. The apparent drop in the final year or two should also be read cautiously, since publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
The clearest gap sits around control-loop stability tuning: only a handful of records in this dataset touch G05B control and regulating systems directly, despite control-loop behaviour being central to any working hybrid closed-loop product. Multi-sensor fusion for dosing decisions and the failure-mode handshake between pump and controller — what happens when a sensor drops out or a connection fails — also show thin coverage relative to their practical importance. These branches sit between the heavily claimed informatics and delivery-device clusters, which is often where genuinely open claim space survives longest.
US10610644B2, assigned to Insulet Corporation, covers methods of generating multiple insulin delivery profiles from flash glucose monitor readings across diurnal time segments, then selecting and delivering the profile projected to hit a target blood glucose level. It is one of the most-cited records in this landscape, reflecting its influence on later filings describing profile-based dosing logic. Anyone building a diurnal or profile-switching dosing feature should review its claims closely, since the citation pattern suggests many subsequent filers have had to design around or build on top of it.
Research Insulin Pump System Integration in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole insulin pump system integration 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.