Metabolomics Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- Concentration is modest at the top. the five most active filers together hold 12.2% of all 8,665 records in scope, and the leading assignee alone accounts for 369 — this is a field with a long tail, not a single gatekeeper.
- Filing peaked in 2020 at 786 records and fell 42% from 2021 (775) to 2024 (449), the last year the dataset treats as complete once publication lag is factored in.
- Bioinformatics claims sit well behind chemistry claims. G16B (bioinformatics) appears in 14.5% of records versus 33.0% for A61K (medicinal preparations), pointing to where computational claims are still comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (775 records) with 2024 (449) — 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 8,665 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What the metabolomics patent record shows
The dataset covers 8,665 published records filed or published between 2015 and the 2026-08-31 cut-off, drawn from filings that combine metabolomics or metabolite-profiling language with genomic, bioinformatic or biomarker claim terms. That intersection is deliberate: it captures where metabolite data meets sequence, expression or bioinformatics pipelines rather than metabolomics analytical chemistry in isolation. Patent families, not raw document counts, are the fairer unit for judging real filing activity, since families neutralise repeat continuations and multi-jurisdiction refiling of the same invention.
Filing activity rose through the late 2010s, peaked in 2020, and has since declined through the most recent complete year. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the last one to two years in any chart will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be — that lag, not a sudden drop in filing, explains the sharp tail at the end of the series.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 8,665 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
A 2020 peak followed by a real but overstated decline
Filings climbed from 521 in 2017 to a peak of 786 in 2020, then eased to 449 by 2024 — a 42% fall from the 775 filed in 2021. Treat 2025 and 2026 figures as still filling in rather than as evidence the field is cooling further.
Chemistry and analysis dominate; bioinformatics and healthcare informatics trail
A61K (medicinal preparations) and G01N (material analysis and testing) each appear in around three in ten of the 8,665 records, with C12N and C12Q close behind. G16B (bioinformatics, 14.5%) and G16H (healthcare informatics, 7.8%) are present but far less claimed, since a record can carry multiple IPC classes these shares add to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 8,665 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Metabolomics Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about metabolomics patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative and most-cited filings
Transomic systems and methods of their use (US20260088123A1)
Provided herein are systems, devices, and methods for processing, analyzing, and classifying biological data sets and generation of cell profiles. The data sets may include multi-omic data. Some embodiments may include the use of machine learning in training a classifier of raw multi-omic data and incorporating system biology knowledge to understand cellular behavior and cell status at the biomolecular level.Filed by Stamm Vegh Corporation, published 2026-03-26 — illustrates the shift toward multi-omic, machine-learning-driven classification pipelines rather than single-analyte metabolite panels.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20050043894A1 | Integrated biosensor and simulation system for diagnosis and therapy | 719 |
| 2 | US20210090694A1 | Data based cancer research and treatment systems and methods | 715 |
| 3 | US20170262604A1 | Systems and methods for health tracking and management | 584 |
| 4 | US20180001184A1 | Smart device | 489 |
| 5 | US20030233670A1 | Gene sequences and uses thereof in plants | 401 |
| 6 | US20070118916A1 | Process for the production of fine chemicals | 350 |
| 7 | US20040072723A1 | Methods and systems to identify operational reaction pathways | 350 |
| 8 | US20190367969A1 | Methods and systems for analysis of chromatin | 342 |
| 9 | US20180330824A1 | Individual and cohort pharmacological phenotype prediction platform | 334 |
| 10 | US20030233218A1 | Systems and methods for constructing genomic-based phenotypic models | 324 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence, not of current technical importance.
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 mean for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the ranking, the trend and the IPC composition are read together.
No single assignee controls the field
The leading assignee holds 369 records and the top five combined reach only 12.2% of all 8,665 records in scope. That is a long tail of institutional and corporate filers rather than a market gated by two or three dominant portfolios.
Volume is down from its 2020 peak, not accelerating
Filings fell from 775 in 2021 to 449 in 2024, continuing off a 2020 peak of 786. Several of the most active named assignees also show falling or zero filings in their latest tracked year, consistent with a maturing rather than expanding filing cycle.
Bioinformatics claims lag chemistry and diagnostics claims
A61K and G01N each cover roughly three in ten records, while G16B (bioinformatics) sits at 14.5% and G16H (healthcare informatics) at 7.8%. Computational and informatics claims around metabolomic data are comparatively less crowded than the underlying chemistry and assay claims.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to metabolomics patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
| Assignee | Co-assignee | Shared families |
|---|---|---|
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | Montpellier University Regional Medical Centre (CHU de Montpellier) | 53 |
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | University of Montpellier | 53 |
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS) | 40 |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc | Broad Institute Inc | 35 |
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | Assistance Publique – Hôpitaux de Paris (AP-HP) | 30 |
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | Sorbonne University | 24 |
| The Regents of the University of California | The Board of Trustees of the University of Illinois | 19 |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc | The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System | 18 |
The ten identified co-assignee pairs cluster around a small set of French research institutions filing jointly, suggesting collaborative academic-clinical programmes rather than broad cross-industry alliances.
Who is filing, and where filing has cooled
The ranked leaders mix diagnostics companies, cancer research institutes and university systems; several of the most active names show declining or flat filing in their latest tracked year.
A single diagnostics-focused leader, well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 369 of the 8,665 records in scope, more than double the fifth-place total of 135 — a meaningful lead, though still far short of controlling the field outright.
Multiple established filers have gone quiet recently
A number of ranked assignees, including several research institutes and university boards, show zero filings in their most recent tracked year, with year-over-year declines of -71% to -100% among others still filing at low volume.
Joint filing is narrow and academically clustered
The strongest co-assignee relationships pair a national health research institute with regional university medical centres, with linkage strengths in the 40-53 record range — a pattern of durable academic-clinical collaboration rather than broad industry consortia.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | 2 | -71% |
| The Regents of the University of California | 1 | -75% |
| Precigen Inc | 0 | — |
| TEMPUS LABS INC | 0 | — |
| Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale (INSERM) | 0 | -100% |
| Berg LLC | 0 | — |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc | 0 | -100% |
| Caris Life Sciences Luxembourg Holding | 0 | — |
Where to take this
The dataset points to a field with open computational claim space and a research-driven, rather than platform-driven, competitive structure.
Check freedom-to-operate around multi-omic classifiers
Machine-learning classification of multi-omic data sets, as in the 2026 representative filing, sits at the intersection of thinly claimed G16B bioinformatics space and denser C12N/C12Q molecular biology claims — worth a targeted clearance search before committing claim language.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaTrack momentum among quiet former leaders
Several previously active assignees show zero or sharply reduced filing in their latest tracked year; watch for acquisition, licensing-out, or a pivot to trade secret protection rather than assuming abandonment of the technology.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaExplore healthcare informatics integration claims
G16H appears in only 7.8% of the 8,665 records despite the clinical relevance of metabolomic data, suggesting room for claims that tie metabolite profiling directly into clinical decision-support workflows.
Explore this branch in EurekaCommon questions about metabolomics patents
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 369 of the 8,665 records in scope, with the field then spreading across a long tail of filers — the top five combined reach only 12.2% of all records. That means no single company or institute controls the space; diagnostics companies, cancer research institutes and university systems all appear among the more active filers. Anyone assessing competitive risk should look at the whole ranked list rather than assuming a handful of names dominate.
Filing peaked in 2020 at 786 records and declined to 449 by 2024, a 42% fall from the 775 filed in 2021 — the last span the dataset treats as complete. Figures for 2025 and 2026 look lower still, but that is expected: publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so recent years are always undercounted until later filings catch up. Based on complete years, the honest read is a cooling off from a 2020 peak, not a field in early growth.
Medicinal preparations (A61K) and material analysis and testing (G01N) are the two most-claimed IPC subclasses, each appearing in roughly three in ten of the 8,665 records, with microorganism and genetic engineering claims (C12N) and enzyme/DNA measurement claims (C12Q) close behind. Bioinformatics (G16B, 14.5%) and healthcare informatics (G16H, 7.8%) are present but considerably less crowded. Since records often carry multiple IPC codes, these percentages overlap rather than summing to 100%.
The clearest gap sits in bioinformatics and healthcare informatics claim space: G16B and G16H together cover a much smaller share of the 8,665 records than the core chemistry and assay classes like A61K and G01N. Multi-omic data fusion, machine-learning classifiers trained on raw omics data, and pipelines that connect metabolite profiling directly to clinical decision support all look comparatively under-claimed. That does not mean the technology is unfiled elsewhere, but within this dataset's claim density it is the area with the most room.
Citation counts in this dataset are a signal of accumulated influence, not current importance, because older filings have simply had more time to be cited within the searched corpus. The most-cited records here date back to the mid-2000s and 2010s and reflect foundational biosensor, cancer-data and health-tracking systems rather than the newest metabolomics-specific claims. A 2026 filing with zero citations may still be more technically relevant to current freedom-to-operate work than a 20-year-old, heavily cited one.
Research Metabolomics Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole metabolomics patent landscape 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.