Molecular Pathology Sample Suitability Patents: Leaders & Gaps 2026
- A cluster of academic and cancer-center filers, not industrial diagnostics firms, holds the leading positions — the top-ranked assignee sits at 8 records against a field of 31 ranked companies.
- Filing peaked in 2019 at 8 records and has since cooled, with the tracked 2021→2024 span down 67% — though 2025-26 counts are still filling in under publication lag.
- C12Q dominates claim scope at 84.7% of the 59 records in scope, while bioinformatics (G16B, 30.5%) and image processing (G06T, 6.8%) remain comparatively open.
Filing growth compares 2021 (3 records) with 2024 (1) — 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.
What this landscape covers
Molecular pathology sample suitability sits at the intersection of specimen handling and downstream sequencing: tumor cell content, macrodissection, fixation artifact and DNA yield are the gatekeeping steps that determine whether a molecular test can run at all. Patent activity in this space tracks the practical question of whether a given tissue block, slide or extract is fit for a given assay, and how a lab documents that decision. The 59 records in scope span from foundational genetic-variation disclosures to newer sequencing-workflow filings, giving a compact but decision-relevant view of who has staked claims on the preanalytical gate.
Coverage runs from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years understate real filing activity and should be read as provisional rather than declining.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 59-record dataset: filing activity by year, and the IPC subclasses that carry the claim scope.
Filing trend
Filings peaked at 8 in 2019. The tracked span from 2021 (3 records) to 2024 (1 record) shows a 67% drop — the last year in the dataset that can be treated as complete. Years after 2024 are still being backfilled by publication lag and should not be read as a continued decline.
Technology composition
C12Q (measuring and testing involving enzymes/DNA) covers 84.7% of the 59 records, confirming that most claims anchor on nucleic-acid quality metrics rather than imaging or histology alone. G16B bioinformatics (30.5%) and G01N material analysis (22.0%) form a secondary tier; G06T image processing (6.8%) and C07H nucleic acid chemistry (5.1%) are the thinnest-claimed classes, both attached to a handful of records.
Shares are the percentage of the 59 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Molecular Pathology Sample Suitability with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about molecular pathology sample suitability and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records in this space
Systems and methods for cancer whole genome and transcriptome sequencing (CWGTS)
Described embodiments provide systems and methods for performing cancer whole genome and transcriptome sequencing (cWGTS). A plurality of datasets can be generated based on sequencing of a tumor sample and a healthy control germline sample. Multiple databases are accessed to support RNA gene expression analysis, DNA ploidy and allelic imbalance analysis, and variant calling analysis, each producing its own set of outputs feeding a broader workflow that generates cohort classification and disease-specific scores.US20230121103A1 · Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center · filed 2023-04-20
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20100196898A1 | Disease-associated genetic variations and methods for obtaining and using same | 125 |
| 2 | US20120214163A1 | Disease-associated genetic variations and methods for obtaining and using same | 83 |
| 3 | US20110217309A1 | Biological markers predictive of Anti-cancer response to insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor kinase inhibit… | 50 |
| 4 | US20150126379A1 | Long insert-based whole genome sequencing | 22 |
| 5 | WO2008148072A2 | Disease-associated genetic variations and methods for obtaining and using same | 18 |
| 6 | WO2019183620A1 | Non-invasive classification of benign and malignant melanocytic lesions using microrna profiling | 13 |
| 7 | WO2011109584A2 | Biological markers predictive of Anti-cancer response to insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor kinase inhibit… | 12 |
| 8 | US20220049297A1 | Method and kit for determining genome instability based on next generation sequencing (NGS) | 10 |
| 9 | WO2013123463A1 | A system and method of genomic profiling | 9 |
| 10 | US20150031556A1 | System and method of genomic profiling | 9 |
Citation counts reflect influence within the searched corpus and skew toward older filings; treat them as a signal of foundational status, not 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 mean for a filing decision
Three findings that shape where new claims can still land in this space.
A cancer-center-led field, not an industrial one
The leading position holds 8 records against a field of 31 ranked companies, with fifth place at 7 and tenth at 5 — a gradual taper rather than a sharp cliff. Academic and cancer-research institutions, not commercial diagnostics vendors, occupy the top of this ranking.
Activity has cooled off its 2019 peak
Filing peaked at 8 records in 2019 and the tracked 2021 (3) to 2024 (1) span shows a 67% decline. Because publication lags filing by about 18 months, 2025-26 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as confirming further decline.
Nucleic-acid measurement claims dominate
C12Q claims cover the large majority of records, meaning most patents in this space describe DNA/RNA yield, quality or content testing rather than pure imaging or histological review. Bioinformatics (G16B) and material analysis (G01N) are present but each cover less than a third of records.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to molecular pathology sample suitability, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is active, and where the gate sits
The ranked leaders are concentrated among cancer-research institutions and their academic partners rather than diagnostics manufacturers, with several of the strongest links appearing as co-assignee pairs between hospitals and their affiliated research institutes.
Hospital-university pairs file jointly
The strongest co-assignee pair in this dataset appears together on 7 records, and two other pairs each recur on 6 — a pattern consistent with cancer centers filing alongside affiliated university or research-institute partners rather than filing solo.
US and PCT routes lead filing strategy
The United States receives the most filings (19), followed closely by WIPO PCT applications (16) and the EPO (15). Canada, Australia and Germany each see single-digit counts, suggesting most applicants prioritize broad US and international coverage before regional follow-through.
No leading assignee is actively filing in the latest tracked year
Every assignee tracked for recent-year momentum shows 0 filings in the latest year — consistent with the broader post-2019 cooling, though this should be weighed against the 18-month publication lag rather than read as firms exiting the space.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Translational Genomics Research Institute | 0 | — |
| Universitätsklinikum Hamburg-Eppendorf | 0 | — |
| University of Burgundy | 0 | — |
| CGFL CENT GEORGES FRANCOIS LECLERC | 0 | — |
| Memorial Hospital for Cancer and Allied Diseases | 0 | — |
| Memorial Sloan Kettering Cancer Center | 0 | — |
| Sloan Kettering Institute for Cancer Research | 0 | — |
| OSI Pharmaceuticals Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a narrow, academically-held claim space around nucleic-acid quality testing, with thinner coverage in imaging and workflow documentation.
Map the co-assignee network in full
The recurring hospital-university filing pairs suggest formal research partnerships shape this field's IP strategy. A full network map would clarify which partnerships are still active.
Explore assignee networks in EurekaWatch the under-claimed branches
Image-based artifact scoring and automated macrodissection guidance carry noticeably thinner IPC coverage than the C12Q core, suggesting room for a first-mover claim.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 8 records out of 31 ranked companies, with fifth place at 7 and tenth place at 5 — a gradual taper rather than one dominant holder. The ranked leaders are drawn mostly from cancer research centers and affiliated universities rather than commercial diagnostics manufacturers. Because the ranking counts patent families rather than raw document counts, it reflects distinct inventions rather than continuation filings or multi-jurisdiction duplicates.
Filing peaked at 8 records in 2019 and the tracked 2021-to-2024 span shows a 67% decline, which is the most recent period that can be treated as complete. Filings from 2025 onward are still understated because publication typically lags the original filing date by about 18 months. Readers should treat the apparent recent drop as a data artifact in the newest years rather than confirmed evidence that the field is contracting.
C12Q, covering measuring and testing involving enzymes and nucleic acids, appears on 84.7% of the 59 records in scope, making it by far the dominant class. G16B bioinformatics (30.5%) and G01N material analysis (22.0%) form a secondary layer, often combined with C12Q on the same record. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, these percentages sum to more than 100% and should not be read as mutually exclusive categories.
The comparatively thin classes in this dataset are G06T image data processing (6.8% of records) and C07H sugars/nucleic acids (5.1%), alongside gaps in automated macrodissection guidance and preanalytical documentation standards. These are sub-areas where the dominant C12Q nucleic-acid testing claims have not been paired with strong imaging or workflow automation coverage. A first claim in these areas would need to tie a specific measurable output, such as an artifact score or yield prediction, to a defined sample-handling step rather than restate the broad testing concept already covered by C12Q filings.
The United States leads as a receiving office with 19 filings, followed by WIPO PCT applications at 16 and the European Patent Office at 15. Canada, Australia and Germany each show single-digit counts. This pattern indicates that most applicants secure broad US protection and international PCT coverage first, then pursue regional filings selectively rather than uniformly across jurisdictions.
Research Molecular Pathology Sample Suitability in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole molecular pathology sample suitability 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.