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/molecular-glue-degrader-discovery-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Targeted Protein DegradationMolecular Glue Degrader Discovery Patents
- 34.7% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees hold 150 of 432 records in scope — a tight cluster followed by a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants.
- Filings grew 82% from 2021 to 2024. Volume rose from 45 to 82 records a year over that span, with the field's peak year so far landing at 93 records in 2023.
- Medicinal preparations dominate the claim set. A61K appears on 68.8% of the 432 records, with heterocyclic compound chemistry (C07D) close behind at 54.4%.
432
Published Records
35%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+82%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
WO
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (45 records) with 2024 (82) — 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 432 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
Molecular glue degraders work by inducing a neosubstrate recognition interface between a target protein and an E3 ligase component such as cereblon, rather than by direct binding to an active site. Patent activity in this space clusters around ternary complex formation, cooperativity measurement, and the phenotypic screening methods used to identify glue candidates before a structural mechanism is understood. This dataset covers 432 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, drawn from search terms spanning molecular glue chemistry, cereblon binding, degradation selectivity and resistance mutation.
Filing activity is recent and still accelerating in the years that are complete: the field went from zero recorded filings in 2017 to a peak of 93 in 2023, with 2021-to-2024 volume up 82%. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures shown in the trend chart understate actual filing activity and should not be read as a slowdown.
Filing activity, 2017–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery 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 trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 432 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.
A field still building filing volume
Filings started from zero in 2017, built steadily, and peaked at 93 records in 2023. The 2021-to-2024 window shows 82% growth in annual volume — the clearest complete-year signal in the dataset. Treat 2025 and 2026 counts as provisional given the typical 18-month publication lag.
Claims concentrate in pharmaceutical composition and heterocyclic chemistry
A61K (medicinal preparations) touches 68.8% of the 432 records and C07D (heterocyclic compounds) 54.4%, reflecting that most filings claim a compound or formulation rather than a screening method alone. A61P (therapeutic activity) sits at 50.2%. Further down the list, C12N, G01N, C07K and C12Q each cover under 15% of records — these are the assay, genetic-engineering and peptide-characterization classes that support discovery work but are claimed far less often than the composition-of-matter classes above them.
Shares are the percentage of the 432 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 Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about molecular glue degrader discovery and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited records in this space
Representative filing
WO2024086347A1 — Methods of designing molecular glue degraders
MONTE ROSA THERAPEUTICS, INC.
Filed by Monte Rosa Therapeutics, this application describes rational and modular design methods for cereblon-based molecular glue degraders. It claims a process of selecting organic "modules," synthesizing candidate MGDs from them, and forming an extended neosubstrate recognition interface on the CRBN surface that reaches beyond the immediate thalidomide binding pocket.Published 2024-04-25.
Most-cited molecular glue and neosubstrate patents
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2019148055A1 | Imide-based modulators of proteolysis and methods of use | 37 |
| 2 | WO2015184526A1 | Soluble bacterial and fungal proteins and methods and uses thereof in inhibiting and dispersing biofilm | 37 |
| 3 | US20190233433A1 | Imide-based modulators of proteolysis and associated methods of use | 26 |
| 4 | WO2023037268A1 | Linkers for use in antibody drug conjugates | 22 |
| 5 | WO2022152822A1 | Treatment of MYC-driven cancers with GSPT1 degraders | 19 |
| 6 | WO2022073469A1 | Compounds and methods of treating cancers | 18 |
| 7 | WO2024241248A1 | Compounds targeting KRAS g12d mutations and their uses | 17 |
| 8 | US20190017998A1 | Compositions and methods for inducing conformational changes in cereblon and other e3 ubiquitin ligases | 17 |
| 9 | WO2022225728A2 | Bifunctional molecules for selective modification of target substrates | 16 |
| 10 | WO2023239750A1 | Bicyclic-substituted glutarimide cereblon binders | 14 |
Ranked by citation count within the searched corpus. Older filings accumulate more citations by default, so treat this as a signal of influence on the field rather than of current commercial relevance.
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 Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery 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
Three patterns stand out once the concentration, growth and technology figures are read together.
Concentration
34.7%
of 432 records held by the top 5 assignees
The top of the field is settled; most of it is not
The five leading assignees account for 150 of the 432 records in scope, and the top 10 combined reach 55.6%. That leaves close to half the field split across a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants, which is where new academic spinouts and platform biotechs are still staking claims.
Ranking covers 97 companies total.
Growth
+82%
filing growth, 2021 to 2024
Momentum is real, but recent years understate it
Annual filings rose from 45 in 2021 to 82 in 2024, and the field's single busiest year so far, 2023, produced 93 records. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the lower counts shown for 2025 and 2026 reflect incomplete data rather than a cooling field.
Peak year to date: 2023, 93 records.
Technology mix
68.8%
of records touch A61K medicinal preparations
Composition claims dominate over pure screening methods
A61K and C07D together cover most of the corpus, meaning the bulk of filings claim a compound, formulation or chemical scaffold rather than a screening or assay method in isolation. The assay-adjacent classes — G01N, C12Q — each sit under 15%, suggesting method-of-identification claims are comparatively less crowded.
C07D heterocyclic compounds: 54.4% of records.
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 molecular glue degrader discovery, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery 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 collaboration lives
The leader in this ranking holds 40 records; fifth place holds 21 and tenth place 16 — a steep drop-off that widens further down the list of 97 ranked companies. Several of the strongest links in the dataset are not competitive at all but academic-industry co-filing pairs, particularly around hospital and research-institute partnerships.
Leader
40
records
A single assignee sets the pace
The top-ranked assignee holds 40 of the 432 records in scope, roughly double the fifth-place holder's 21. That gap is wide enough that a newcomer competing head-on for cereblon-binding composition claims is filing into genuinely dense prior art.
Top 5 combined: 150 records, 34.7% of the field.
Co-filing
26
shared records, strongest pair
Academic-hospital pairs anchor the densest collaborations
The dataset records 10 recurring co-assignee pairs. The strongest, a hospital paired with a research institute, spans 26 shared records — evidence that some of the field's deepest prior art was built through long-running academic partnerships rather than single-company R&D.
Third-strongest pair spans 13 shared records.
Momentum
0% to -100%
YoY range among tracked assignees
Recent-year activity is uneven even among leaders
Latest-year momentum varies sharply: one assignee held flat at 4 filings with 0% YoY, while others that were active in prior years show 0 filings and -100% YoY in the most recent complete year. This split is consistent with a field where a handful of platform companies keep filing steadily while academic co-filers move in bursts tied to individual research programmes.
Compare against the 18-month publication lag before reading any single year as a trend.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Gluetacs Therapeutics (Shanghai) Co., Ltd. | 4 | 0% |
| The Brigham & Women's Hospital, Inc. | 1 | — |
| The Broad Institute, Inc. | 1 | — |
| Orionis Biosciences Inc. | 1 | — |
| St. Jude Children's Research Hospital, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| C4 Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Captor Therapeutics SA | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery 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 dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the question is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or scouting.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 10
With 55.6% of the 432 records held by ten assignees, a composition-of-matter claim in cereblon-based chemistry needs to be checked against that cluster first, not the long tail.
Run a freedom-to-operate searchTrack the under-claimed branches
Non-cereblon E3 ligase chemotypes and resistance-mutation-specific design sit well below the density of the core A61K/C07D claims — worth monitoring before they fill in.
Set up a watch on these branchesMap co-filing patterns before partnering
The strongest co-assignee pair in this dataset spans 26 shared records, showing that some of the deepest prior art here was built jointly rather than by one company alone.
Explore collaboration patternsSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery 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 about molecular glue degrader patents
This dataset identifies 432 published records in scope, filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, using search terms covering molecular glue chemistry, cereblon binding, ternary complex formation and related discovery methods. The assignee ranking built from these records covers 97 companies. Because a single invention can generate several related filings across jurisdictions, patent families are a more reliable unit for counting distinct inventions than raw document counts, though the 432 figure already reflects family-level counting in this ranking.
The field shows a concentrated top tier: the leading assignee holds 40 of the 432 records, and the top five combined account for 150 records, or 34.7% of all records in scope. The top ten extend that to 55.6%. Beyond that group, the remaining 87 ranked companies each hold comparatively small counts, forming a long tail typical of a research area still moving from academic discovery into company-led platforms.
Yes, based on the complete-year data. Filings rose from 45 records in 2021 to 82 in 2024, an 82% increase, and 2023 was the single busiest year so far with 93 records. The lower counts shown for 2025 and 2026 reflect the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than an actual slowdown, so those most recent years should not be read as a decline.
Most filings sit in pharmaceutical composition and organic chemistry classes: A61K (medicinal preparations) appears on 68.8% of the 432 records and C07D (heterocyclic compounds) on 54.4%, with A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) at 50.2%. Supporting classes like G01N (material analysis and testing), C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) and C07K (peptides and proteins) each cover under 15% of records, indicating that composition and formulation claims are far more common than pure assay or screening-method claims in this space.
WO2024086347A1, filed by Monte Rosa Therapeutics and published in April 2024, claims methods for the rational and modular design of cereblon-based molecular glue degraders. Its core claims cover selecting organic building-block modules, synthesizing candidate degraders from them, and forming an extended neosubstrate recognition interface on the CRBN surface that reaches beyond the classic thalidomide binding pocket. Anyone building a modular glue design pipeline around cereblon should review its claim scope directly, since it addresses the design methodology itself rather than a single compound.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery 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 Molecular Glue Degrader Discovery in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole molecular glue degrader discovery 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.