Fastest
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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/ionizable-lipid-design-and-organ-tropism-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Pharma & BiomaterialsIonizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism Patents
- 27.8% concentration at the top. the five most active assignees together hold 213 of the 766 records in scope, while the ranking still runs 100 companies deep.
- Filing has flattened, not grown. activity peaked at 189 records in 2024 and the 2022 midpoint (128) already sat well below that, with the most recent year understated by publication lag.
- A61K and C12N dominate the claim space. 90.7% of records touch medicinal preparations and 36.2% touch genetic engineering classes, leaving organo-metallic chemistry (C07F, 3.1%) comparatively open.
766
Published Records
28%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+191%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
WO
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (65 records) with 2024 (189) — 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 766 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks 766 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine ionizable lipid chemistry — apparent pKa tuning, biodegradable ester linkages, charge modulation — with claims on lipid nanoparticle organ tropism or selective organ targeting formulations. The search string pairs title/abstract terms for the lipid platform with claim-level language on endosomal escape, immunogenicity and structure-activity relationships, so the corpus skews toward records that argue a specific chemical modification changes biodistribution rather than general nanoparticle manufacturing.
Because a single family often carries several IPC classes and multiple receiving-office filings, the totals below are read as families first and jurisdiction counts second. WIPO (PCT) is the largest single receiving office at 184 filings, ahead of Europe, the United States, Canada, Australia and Israel — consistent with applicants seeking broad early-stage coverage before committing to national phase.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 766-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim volume.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 189 in 2024. The 2022 midpoint of 128 sits below that peak, and the 2026 count of 17 is a partial year still working through the roughly 18-month publication lag — read the last one to two years as understated, not as a real decline.
IPC subclass composition
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears in 90.7% of the 766 records, confirming that most filings are framed as therapeutic formulations rather than pure materials science. C12N (36.2%) and C07C (26.5%) point to heavy overlap with genetic-engineering delivery and acyclic lipid chemistry, while B82Y (5.0%) and C07F (3.1%) mark the thinner, more specialised edges of the field.
Shares are the percentage of the 766 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Filing trend and technology composition. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about ionizable lipid design and organ tropism and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Most-cited records in the corpus
Representative recent filing
Ionizable lipid compounds comprising amidine crosslinkers or aryl-alkyl disulfides and lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) comprising the same
THE TRUSTEES OF THE UNIVERSITY OF PENNSYLVANIA
The disclosure relates, in one aspect, to ionizable lipid compounds of formula (I) comprising an aryl-alkyl disulfide moiety. The disclosure relates, in another aspect, to ionizable lipid compounds of formula (II) comprising an amidine moiety. In another aspect, the disclosure relates to lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) comprising at least one ionizable lipid of formula (I) or (II). In another aspect, the disclosure provides methods of the LNPs of the disclosure for delivery of therapeutic cargo.Filed by The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania, published 2026-04-23 — one of the most recent filings in scope and a useful marker of where the claim language is heading.
Highest-citation records
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2019051289A1 | Lipid nanoparticle formulations of non-viral, capsid-free DNA vectors | 165 |
| 2 | US20200129445A1 | Lipid nanoparticle formulation | 140 |
| 3 | WO2019051289A9 | Lipid nanoparticle formulations of non-viral, capsid-free DNA vectors | 131 |
| 4 | WO2018170336A1 | Lipid nanoparticle formulation | 111 |
| 5 | WO2019246203A1 | Lipid nanoparticle compositions for delivery of mRNA and long nucleic acids | 65 |
| 6 | WO2021102411A1 | Ionizable lipids and nanoparticle compositions thereof | 32 |
| 7 | US20210121411A1 | Lipid nanoparticle compositions for delivery of mRNA and long nucleic acids | 29 |
| 8 | WO2021250263A1 | Lipid nanoparticles | 27 |
| 9 | WO2021148511A1 | Lipid nanoparticles | 24 |
| 10 | WO2022246555A1 | Method for producing an ionizable lipid | 19 |
Citation counts inside this searched corpus favour older, earlier-filed records — treat them as a signal of influence on later filings, not as a ranking of current technical importance.
Each row carries its publication number; clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Citation counts and representative records. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Run it yourself
Put your own technology through the same analysis
Where to run it
For builders
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 →Insights
What the numbers mean for a filing decision
Reading concentration, trend and citation data together points to where claim space is crowded and where it is not.
Concentration
27.8% of 766
top 5 assignees
A top-heavy but not closed field
The five most active assignees account for 213 of the 766 records in scope, yet the ranking still extends to 100 companies. That combination — a concentrated top with a long tail — usually means core lipid scaffolds are claimed but specific delivery indications and organ-targeting variants remain open to new entrants.
Assignee ranking, 100 companies
Momentum
189 in 2024
peak filing year
Growth has flattened since the 2024 peak
Filing rose steadily from zero in 2017 to 189 in 2024, but the 2022 midpoint of 128 already trailed the eventual peak, and momentum data for several leading assignees shows year-over-year declines heading into the most recent year. Some of that apparent drop-off is publication lag rather than a real pullback.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Technology mix
90.7% A61K
share of 766 records
Formulation claims dominate over pure chemistry
Nine in ten records sit in A61K medicinal preparations, with genetic engineering (C12N, 36.2%) and acyclic/carbocyclic chemistry (C07C, 26.5%) close behind. Organo-metallic chemistry (C07F) and nanotechnology-specific claims (B82Y) each cover under 5% of records, marking the thinner edges of current claim coverage.
IPC composition, 766 records
Citation signal
165 citations
top-cited record
Early LNP formulation patents anchor the field
The most-cited records in this corpus are formulation patents on non-viral, capsid-free DNA vectors and general lipid nanoparticle formulations rather than organ-tropism-specific claims. That gap between what is most cited and what is most recently filed suggests the organ-targeting layer is still being built on top of older, foundational formulation art.
Most-cited records table
Eureka AI Agent
Looking for what nobody has claimed yet?
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to ionizable lipid design and organ tropism, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where the claim gates sit
The assignee ranking is dominated by a mix of biotech developers and university technology-transfer offices, with co-filing patterns that reveal a small number of tight academic-industry pairings.
Leader
62 records
top-ranked assignee
A single leader well ahead of fifth place
The top-ranked assignee holds 62 records against 33 at fifth place and 24 at tenth — a steep drop-off that marks a genuine leader rather than a cluster of near-equal filers.
Assignee ranking
Co-filing
21 shared families
strongest pair
Academic-industry pairs anchor some of the densest filing
Of nine identified co-assignee pairs, the strongest links one immunotherapeutics developer with a university partner across 21 shared families, far ahead of the next pairing at 6. These tight pairs often signal a licensed core patent estate rather than open competition.
Co-assignee pairs, n=9
Momentum
-71% to -100% YoY
leading assignees, latest year
Even active filers are slowing into the most recent year
Several of the most historically active assignees show sharp year-over-year declines or zero filings in the latest year. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, some of this is filings still working through the pipeline rather than a genuine retreat.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania | 2 | -71% |
| Akagera Medicines Inc | 1 | -92% |
| Generation Bio Co | 0 | — |
| ZIPHIUS NV | 0 | — |
| Ziphius NV | 0 | -100% |
| Etherna Immunotherapies NV | 0 | -100% |
| Sail Biomedicines Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Nanovation Therapeutics Inc | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
What's Next
Where to take this analysis
The patterns above point to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or identifying a filing gap.
Map claims against the under-claimed branches
Cross-reference the organo-metallic and peptide-conjugate chip list against pending applications to see whether a specific chemistry is genuinely open or simply under-indexed in this search string.
Explore in Eureka →Track the leading assignees' pipeline, not just their past filings
Given the publication lag, current momentum figures likely understate work already filed but not yet published. Watching continuation filings from the top-ranked assignees is more informative than the raw yearly count.
Explore in Eureka →Read the most-cited formulation patents before drafting new claims
The highest-citation records anchor foundational LNP formulation language that newer organ-tropism claims are built on top of — understanding their claim scope first narrows the drafting target.
Explore in Eureka →Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions on this landscape
The assignee ranking in this dataset covers 100 companies drawn from 766 records, and it is led by a single assignee with 62 records, well ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 33. The top five assignees combined account for 213 records, or 27.8% of the full 766-record corpus. That said, the ranking still runs 100 companies deep, so the field is concentrated at the top without being closed to new entrants.
Filing activity rose from zero in 2017 to a peak of 189 records in 2024, but the 2022 midpoint of 128 already trailed that eventual peak, indicating growth had already begun to flatten before the peak year. The 2026 count of 17 is a partial year and should not be read as a decline, since publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months. Overall the trend reads as flat-to-declining momentum among several previously active assignees rather than sustained acceleration.
A61K, medicinal preparations, appears in 90.7% of the 766 records in scope, making it by far the dominant classification. C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) follows at 36.2%, and C07C (acyclic and carbocyclic compounds) at 26.5%. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares are each measured against the full 766-record total and add up to more than 100%, which is expected.
The technology composition data shows organo-metallic chemistry (C07F, 3.1% of records) and nanotechnology-specific formulation claims (B82Y, 5.0%) are the thinnest-covered classes relative to the dominant A61K and C12N clusters. Peptide-conjugated targeting ligands (C07K, 3.7%) sit in similar territory. These lower shares suggest less claim density in those specific chemistries, though a full freedom-to-operate check requires searching each branch directly rather than relying on aggregate class shares.
WO2026085468A1, filed by The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania and published 2026-04-23, claims ionizable lipid compounds built around two specific chemical moieties: an aryl-alkyl disulfide (formula I) and an amidine crosslinker (formula II), along with lipid nanoparticles incorporating either lipid and methods of using them to deliver therapeutic cargo. It is one of the most recently published records in this corpus, making it a useful indicator of where claim language on biodegradable linkage chemistry is currently heading. Anyone drafting around it should look closely at the specific crosslinker and disulfide moiety definitions rather than the broader LNP delivery method claims.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Ionizable Lipid Design and Organ Tropism in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole ionizable lipid design and organ tropism 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.