Multiplex & Point-of-Care Immunoassay Patents: Leaders, Trends 2026
- 35.8% concentration. The top 5 of 100 ranked assignees account for 192 of 537 records in scope — a field with a clear head but still room past the leaders.
- Filings cooled from a 2021 peak. Filings ran 75 in 2021 down to 37 in 2024, a -51% swing over that span, though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in under publication lag.
- Material analysis dominates the claims. G01N appears on 53.4% of the 537 records, well ahead of therapeutic and peptide-related classes, showing where assay-format claims cluster.
Filing growth compares 2021 (75 records) with 2024 (37) — 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 537 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Multiplex and point-of-care immunoassay patenting sits at the intersection of assay chemistry and device engineering: claims cover cross-reactivity control, spatial multiplexing formats, whole-blood sample handling, and the quantitative readers that turn a lateral-flow strip or microfluidic cartridge into a reportable result. The search scope pulls 537 records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine multiplex or point-of-care immunoassay language with these specific technical hooks — cold-chain-free stability, regulatory waiver requirements, or cross-reactivity claims — rather than immunoassay art in general.
That scoping matters for freedom-to-operate work: a broader immunoassay search would pull in thousands of records with no bearing on point-of-care format or multiplexing claims specifically, diluting the signal on where device-level and workflow-level patents actually sit.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 537 records: activity over time, and how claims distribute across IPC subclasses. Publication lag means the most recent one to two years always look thinner than they will once pending applications post.
Filings rose to a 2021 peak, then eased
Annual filings climbed from 68 in 2017 to a peak of 75 in 2021, then declined to 37 by 2024 — a -51% move over that three-year window. Treat 2025 and 2026 as incomplete rather than as evidence of a continuing decline; both years are still accumulating publications.
G01N and A61K anchor the classification mix
G01N (material analysis and testing) appears on 53.4% of the 537 records, ahead of A61K (medicinal preparations) at 42.3% and C07K (peptides and proteins) at 34.5%. The enzymatic and microbial classes — C12Q, C12N, C12P, C12M — sit well below 20% each, marking assay-adjacent biological methods as a comparatively lighter-claimed layer beneath the device and formulation classes.
Shares are the percentage of the 537 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Multiplex and Point-of-Care Immunoassays with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about multiplex and point-of-care immunoassays and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records anchor the microfluidic assay-device lineage
Volumetric absorptive microsampling devices and methods of using the same
The filing describes a microsampling device for analysing proteins in a biological sample, including a whole blood sample, together with methods of using it — a compact example of the sample-collection layer that sits underneath multiplex point-of-care assay claims.Filed by The University of Sydney, published 2025-03-13 (US20250084122A1).
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20090325276A1 | Integrated microfluidic assay devices and methods | 358 |
| 2 | WO2007033385A2 | Microfluidic assay devices and methods | 152 |
| 3 | US20070074972A1 | Microfluidic assay devices and methods | 142 |
| 4 | WO2008147382A1 | Integrated microfluidic assay devices and methods | 116 |
| 5 | WO2010132723A1 | Biomarkers for determining sensitivity of breast cancer cells to her2-targeted therapy | 65 |
| 6 | WO2007056858A1 | Anti-alpha2 integrin antibodies and their uses | 59 |
| 7 | US20130053273A1 | Methods and devices for multiplexed microarray microfluidic analysis of biomolecules | 52 |
| 8 | US20190070262A1 | Interleukin-18 variants and methods of use | 50 |
| 9 | US20110071042A1 | Biomarkers for determining sensitivity of breast cancer cells to her2-targeted therapy | 35 |
| 10 | US20070128190A1 | Anti-alpha2 integrin antibodies and their uses | 30 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus — read them as a signal of influence on later filers, not as a ranking 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 say about the field
Four figures from the dataset that matter more for strategy than for description alone.
A head group, not a monopoly
The leading assignee holds 55 records against a fifth-place figure of 25 and a tenth-place figure of 14 — a steep drop-off after the leader, then a long, gradually thinning tail across the remaining ranked assignees.
Post-peak cooling, not a lasting deceleration is Not proven
Filings fell from 75 in 2021 to 37 in 2024. Several of the most active named assignees show zero filings in the latest tracked year, but with publication lag running around 18 months, that reads as an incomplete recent window rather than confirmed withdrawal.
Assay and device claims outweigh biological method claims
Material-analysis and medicinal-preparation classes (G01N, A61K) sit well ahead of the enzyme- and microorganism-related classes (C12Q, C12N, C12P, C12M), each under 20% of records, indicating the device and formulation layers are more heavily claimed than the underlying biological assay chemistry.
US and PCT routes lead, Europe close behind
The United States received 124 filings and WIPO's PCT route 96, with Europe at 88 — a filing pattern consistent with applicants seeking broad early coverage through PCT before narrowing to national or regional phases.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to multiplex and point-of-care immunoassays, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where activity is clustering
The ranked assignee list covers 100 companies and institutions across 537 records — a mix of university technology-transfer filings, diagnostics specialists, and pharmaceutical companies protecting companion-diagnostic formats.
One assignee sets the pace
The leading assignee's 55 records outpace the fifth-ranked assignee's 25 by more than double, suggesting a sustained, multi-year filing program rather than a single burst of activity.
Academic-industry co-filing is present but limited
The strongest co-assignee pairing links two academic and industry partners at 25 shared records, with two hospital-university-industry clusters following at 14 and 11 — evidence of formal collaboration structures rather than incidental co-invention.
Momentum has paused across multiple leaders, not just one
Several assignees that built substantial portfolios show zero filings in the most recent tracked year, including year-on-year drops described as -100%. Given publication lag, this is better read as a reporting gap than a confirmed exit from the space.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Yale University | 0 | -100% |
| IGI Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | — |
| IDEXX Laboratories, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Novartis AG | 0 | — |
| Simcha IL-18, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Stellenbosch University | 0 | — |
| Pionyr Immunotherapeutics, Inc. | 0 | — |
| DECIMADX LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific follow-up work depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, licensing, or R&D prioritisation.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on device-layer claims
With G01N and A61K classes covering the largest share of records, a targeted FTO search on assay-device and formulation claims is likely more productive than a broad immunoassay sweep.
Explore claims in Eureka →Track the leading assignees' pending applications
Given publication lag, the apparent pause among top filers in the latest year needs confirming against pending applications not yet published.
Monitor assignee activity →Evaluate the under-claimed branches for early filing
Cold-chain-free stabilization and reader calibration methods show lighter claim density than the core device classes, which may leave room for a differentiated first claim.
Assess white space in Eureka →Common questions about this landscape
The ranked assignee list covers 100 companies and institutions across 537 records in scope, with the leading assignee holding 55 records against 25 at fifth place and 14 at tenth. That gap shows a concentrated head group rather than a single dominant monopoly, since the top 5 combined account for 35.8% of all records and the top 10 for 50.7%. Beyond the top group, filing activity spreads thinly across the remaining ranked assignees, including universities, diagnostics specialists and pharmaceutical companies filing around companion-diagnostic formats.
Filings peaked at 75 in 2021 and fell to 37 by 2024, a -51% change over that span. However, publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the 2025-2026 figures in any dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as confirmation of a continuing decline. The more defensible reading is that activity cooled from a 2021 high, with the true current trajectory not yet fully visible in published data.
G01N (material analysis and testing) appears on 53.4% of the 537 records in scope, the single most common IPC subclass, followed by A61K (medicinal preparations) at 42.3% and C07K (peptides and proteins) at 34.5%. Enzyme- and microorganism-related classes such as C12Q, C12N, C12P and C12M each sit under 20%, indicating device and formulation claims currently outweigh claims on the underlying biological assay chemistry. Because a single record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should not be summed.
The lighter-claimed branches identified in this dataset include cold-chain-free reagent stabilization, quantitative reader calibration methods, cross-reactivity suppression chemistries, and spatial multiplexing on alternative substrates such as paper. These sit below the dominant G01N and A61K claim density, suggesting less crowded prior art for a well-scoped first claim. Any white-space assessment should still be paired with a direct search against the specific claim language intended, since IPC-level shares only indicate broad density, not exact freedom-to-operate.
Records such as US20090325276A1, cited 358 times within this corpus, and its related family members (WO2007033385A2, US20070074972A1, WO2008147382A1) represent foundational microfluidic assay-device art that later filers have repeatedly built on or cited around. High citation counts inside a searched corpus favour older records simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations, so this reflects influence on subsequent filings rather than a statement that the technology remains the most commercially important today. New filers in adjacent microfluidic or cartridge-based formats should expect to navigate this citation lineage during prior-art review.
Research Multiplex and Point-of-Care Immunoassays in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole multiplex and point-of-care immunoassays 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.