https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/nanoparticle-immunogenicity-and-reactogenicity-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Lipid Nanoparticle Delivery
Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity Patents
  • 64.4% concentration. The top five assignees hold 491 of the 762 records in scope — a field with one dominant filer and a long tail below it.
  • Filings cooled after 2021. Filings fell from 82 in 2021 to 28 in 2024, a 66% drop over three years, though 2025-26 counts are still filling in as publication catches up.
  • One family anchors the citation graph. WO2017099823A1 is cited 647 times, more than double the next most-cited record, and sits squarely on accelerated blood clearance and toxicity claims.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
762
Published Records
64%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-66%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (82 records) with 2024 (28) — 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 762 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 landscape tracks patent filings addressing nanoparticle immunogenicity and reactogenicity — the immune-recognition problems that follow repeated dosing of lipid nanoparticle (LNP) formulations, including anti-PEG antibody formation, complement activation, accelerated blood clearance, and the species-specific differences that complicate translating rodent data to clinic. The scope spans 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off and draws on 762 records where these mechanisms are claimed alongside delivery composition or dosing method.

Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent one to two years in any trend understate real filing activity; 2024 is the most recent year that can be read as materially complete.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1MODERNATX INC362
  2. 2BIONTECH SE42
  3. 3GLAXOSMITHKLINE BIOLOGICALS SA36
  4. 4JOHANNES GUTENBERG UNIV28
  5. 5BIO BEDST23
  6. 6MALCOLM THOMAS21
  7. 7ACAD SINICA21
  8. 8CUREVAC SE20
  9. 9THERMOSOME19
  10. 10ARCTURUS THERAPEUTICS INC19
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity 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 762 records: the year-by-year filing count, and the IPC subclasses those filings claim under.

Filings peaked in 2019 and have since declined

Filings rose from 91 in 2017 to a peak of 95 in 2019, then fell to 28 by 2024 — a 66% drop from the 2021 count of 82. Treat 2025 and 2026 as incomplete rather than as evidence the field has gone quiet.

Filings peaked in 2019 and have since declined0255075100912017201895201920202021202220232024202522026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Medicinal preparations and genetic engineering dominate the classification mix

A61K (medicinal preparations) appears on 88.3% of the 762 records, with C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) on 43.7% and A61P (therapeutic activity) on 35.8%. Polymer-chemistry classes — C08G, C07C, C08L — sit in the 5-11% range, marking where PEG-alternative and polymer-composition claims concentrate.

Medicinal preparations and genetic engineering dominate the classification mixA61K · Medicinal preparations67388.3%C12N · Microorganisms & genetic engin…33343.7%A61P · Therapeutic activity of compou…27335.8%C07K · Peptides & proteins19024.9%C08G · Condensation polymers8411.0%C07C · Acyclic & carbocyclic compounds699.1%C08L · Polymer compositions415.4%C07H · Sugars & nucleic acids293.8%Other11815.5%

Shares are the percentage of the 762 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 Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about nanoparticle immunogenicity and reactogenicity and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Key Patents

The most-cited records anchoring this space

Representative Filing
WO2017099823A12017-06-15

WO2017099823A1 — Compositions and methods for delivery of therapeutic agents

MODERNATX, INC.

This disclosure provides improved lipid-based compositions, including lipid nanoparticle compositions, and methods of use thereof for delivering agents in vivo including nucleic acids and proteins. These compositions are not subject to accelerated blood clearance and they have an improved toxicity profile in vivo.Filed by ModernaTX, Inc., published 2017-06-15. Cited 647 times, the single most-cited record in this landscape.

WO2017099823A1 — patent drawing 1WO2017099823A1 — patent drawing 2
View full filing
Most-cited records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1WO2017099823A1Compositions and methods for delivery of therapeutic agents647
2US20180028664A1Compositions and methods for delivery of agents300
3WO2020061367A1Compounds and compositions for intracellular delivery of therapeutic agents209
4WO2018232357A1RNA formulations180
5WO2017201333A1Polynucleotides encoding lipoprotein lipase for the treatment of hyperlipidemia152
6US10207010B2Compositions and methods for delivery of agents151
7WO2017201340A2Polynucleotides encoding relaxin144
8WO2018144082A1RNA cancer vaccines143
9WO2017062513A1Methods for therapeutic administration of messenger ribonucleic acid drugs141
10WO2020061284A1Peg lipids and uses thereof121

Citation counts favour older filings within the searched corpus; read them as a measure of influence on subsequent filings, not as a signal of current 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 Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity 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
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 →
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 filing strategy

Three patterns stand out in this dataset: heavy concentration at the top of the assignee table, a citation graph dominated by one early filing, and a classification mix that shows where the chemistry claims actually sit.

Concentration
64.4%
of 762 records held by top 5

The field has one dominant filer and a long tail

The leading assignee alone accounts for 362 of the 762 records in scope, with the next four filers combining for the remainder of the top-five share. Below tenth place — 19 records — the ranking thins into single- and double-digit filers.

88 companies ranked in total
Momentum
-66%
filings, 2021 to 2024

Filing pace has cooled from its 2019 peak

After peaking at 95 filings in 2019, annual output fell to 28 by 2024. That decline is real over that window, but 2025-26 figures are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a continuation of the drop.

Peak year: 2019 at 95 filings
Classification mix
88.3%
of records carry A61K

Medicinal-preparation claims dominate, polymer chemistry is a minority

A61K and C12N together cover the bulk of the corpus, but PEG-alternative and polymer-composition claims — C08G, C07C, C08L — sit in single-digit-to-low-double-digit territory, suggesting the polymer-chemistry side of this problem is comparatively less claimed.

C08G at 11.0%, C07H at 3.8%
Citation anchor
647 citations
on the top record

One 2017 filing shapes the prior art landscape

WO2017099823A1 is cited more than double the next most-cited record. Its claims on accelerated-blood-clearance-resistant compositions are a reference point that later filers in this space have had to design around or license.

Next-ranked record cited 300 times
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 nanoparticle immunogenicity and reactogenicity, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity 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 holds the ground, and where it opens up

Filing activity concentrates among a small number of large pharmaceutical and biotech assignees, with academic institutions and smaller biotechs filling in specific mechanistic niches around them.

Leader
362 records
leading assignee

One filer holds nearly half the corpus

The top assignee's 362 records dwarf the rest of the ranked field; fifth place holds 23 and tenth place 19, meaning the drop-off from the leader is steep rather than gradual.

88 companies ranked overall
Co-filing
10 pairs
co-assignee relationships

Collaboration is limited but concentrated

Only ten co-assignee pairs appear across the dataset, with the strongest pairing appearing on 16 shared records. This points to occasional formal partnerships rather than a broadly collaborative filing culture in this niche.

Strongest pair: 16 shared records
Momentum
-100% YoY
for several top-10 filers

Most established filers have gone quiet in the latest year

Several of the leading assignees show zero filings in the latest tracked year against prior activity, a pattern consistent across multiple large filers rather than isolated to one company. Given publication lag, this likely reflects filings still working through the pipeline rather than an actual stop.

Pattern seen across five of the largest filers
🔍
Under-claimed sub-areas worth checking before filing
Branches where the classification data suggests thinner claim density relative to the core LNP composition space.
PEG-free steric stabilizer chemistriescomplement-activation-resistant lipid headgroupsspecies-translatable dosing modelsrepeat-dose tolerance formulationsanti-PEG antibody detection assays
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
MALCOLM THOMAS1—
ModernaTX, Inc.0-100%
BioNTech SE0-100%
GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA0-100%
Johannes Gutenberg University Mainz0-100%
CureVac SE0-100%
Bio Bedst ApS0—
Academia Sinica0—
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity 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 figures here describe where claims already sit. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific claim language and specific competitors.

Map claim scope on the top-cited families

Start with WO2017099823A1 and the other most-cited records to understand exactly what compositional and dosing language is already blocked before drafting new claims in the same space.

Explore claims in Eureka

Track the leading assignee's recent filings directly

Because the top filer holds well over half the top-five share, its prosecution activity is the single most useful early signal for where this field moves next.

Set up assignee tracking in Eureka

Test the under-claimed branches against your own formulation

The polymer-chemistry and species-translation gaps identified here are starting points, not conclusions — verify claim density against your specific composition before relying on white space.

Run a gap search in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity 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

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity 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 Nanoparticle Immunogenicity and Reactogenicity in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole nanoparticle immunogenicity and reactogenicity corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve

Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.