Neural Tissue Engineering Patent Landscape 2026
Neural tissue engineering is a maturing, moderately concentrated field led by a mix of pharmaceutical companies and academic institutions, with Mochida Pharmaceutical holding the top position among ranked filers. Annual filing volume has eased from its 2017 peak, and the United States remains the dominant filing jurisdiction, signaling a field that is consolidating rather than rapidly expanding.
Academic institutions and a handful of specialist firms lead a moderately concentrated field
Mochida Pharmaceutical leads the ranked applicants with 19 patent records, followed closely by the University of Zurich with 18 and Tulavi Therapeutics Inc. with 17. The top tier is a distinctive blend of Japanese pharmaceutical companies, Swiss research universities, and US-based therapeutic startups, reflecting the interdisciplinary nature of neural tissue engineering.
The top five filers together account for 25% of the combined total among the hundred largest filers, indicating moderate concentration. No single organization has achieved dominant lock-in, and the gap between first and fifth place (19 versus 13 patent records) is narrow enough that challengers could close it with focused filing.
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 19 | |
| 2 | University of Zurich | 18 | |
| 3 | Tulavi Therapeutics Inc. | 17 | |
| 4 | Integra LifeSciences Corp. | 16 | |
| 5 | Rutgers University | 13 | |
| 6 | University of Florida Research Foundation Inc. | 10 | |
| 7 | University of Utah Research Foundation | 10 | |
| 8 | Board of Regents, The University of Texas System | 8 | |
| 9 | Nantong University | 7 | |
| 10 | IRegene Therapeutics Ltd. | 7 |
| # | Applicant | Patent records | Share |
|---|---|---|---|
| 11 | TissueGen Inc. | 7 | |
| 12 | ETH Zurich | 7 | |
| 13 | Stanford University | 7 | |
| 14 | Zaidan Hojin Tazuke Kofukai | 7 | |
| 15 | ASSOC FOR THE ADVANCEMENT OF TISSUE ENG & CELL BAS… | 6 | |
| 16 | YEDA RES & DEV CO LTD | 6 | |
| 17 | Johns Hopkins University | 6 | |
| 18 | Wake Forest University Health Sciences | 6 | |
| 19 | Newrotex Ltd. | 6 | |
| 20 | Stryker Corporation | 5 |
The presence of multiple universities and research foundations at the top of the ranking suggests that foundational science is still being converted into IP, and that commercial players who can translate academic advances into clinical products may find meaningful white space.
Patent publication typically lags filing by 18–24 months, so activity in 2024–2026 is under-counted in this dataset; the apparent decline in recent years should not be read as a final trend. Longer-window growth, applicant concentration, and technology-route coverage are therefore more reliable signals than the latest-year bar alone.
Filing volume has eased from a 2017 peak; scaffold biomaterials dominate the technology mix
The annual filing trend and the IPC technology composition together reveal both the pace of change and the structural priorities of this field. Reading them together helps identify where investment is concentrating and where adjacent classes remain under-served.
Annual filing trend
Filings peaked in 2017 and have trended downward since, with a partial rebound in 2021. Years 2024–2026 are materially under-counted due to publication lag and should not be interpreted as confirming continued decline; the true recent-year totals will be higher once pending applications publish.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaTechnology composition
A61L (sterilising, disinfecting, and biomaterials for implants) is the dominant IPC branch by a wide margin, reflecting the central role of scaffold and conduit materials in neural tissue engineering. A61K (medicinal preparations) and A61F (implants and prostheses) form a secondary tier, while branches such as A61N (electrotherapy), C08L (polymer compositions), and B33Y (additive manufacturing/3D printing) are present but sparse, pointing to areas where the technology space remains open.
↗ Hover for values · click a bar to ask EurekaHighly cited patent families surfaced by the query
Citation-heavy patent families returned by the query. Use this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents.
Implantable nerve guidance conduits having polymer…
A nerve guidance conduit includes one or more guidance channels formed as porous polymeric structures. The guidance channels are within an outer tubular structure that includes randomly-oriented nanofibers. The guidance channels may have electrospun nanofibers on their inner and outer surfaces in a parallel alignment with the guidance channels. Such aligned… (excerpt from the patent abstract)
| # | Patent | Citations |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Biodegradable, electrically conducting polymer for… | 109 |
| 2 | Morphogen-induced nerve regeneration and repair | 83 |
| 3 | Spinal cord surgical implant | 76 |
| 4 | Multi-lumen polymeric guidance channel, method for… | 74 |
| 5 | Multi-lumen polymeric guidance channel and method … | 73 |
| 6 | Electrospun nerve guides for nerve regeneration de… | 68 |
| 7 | Bio-acceptable conduits and method providing the s… | 64 |
| 8 | Growth factor modified protein matrices for tissue… | 61 |
Ranked by total forward citations. Citation counts favour older and broadly cited patent families, and broad or adjacent patents may appear when they match the search scope. Treat this section as citation context, not as a curated list of the most topic-specific patents. Some patent titles may be shown in their original, non-English language where an accurate translation could not be guaranteed.
What the competitive structure means for R&D and investment decisions
Four structural dimensions—maturity, concentration, collaboration, and geography—frame the strategic context for any organization considering entry, expansion, or partnership in neural tissue engineering.
Field is in a decline phase, easing from a 2017 peak
The lifecycle evidence places neural tissue engineering in a decline stage, with annual filing volume easing back from the 2017 peak of 28 records. This does not mean the technology is obsolete; rather, the initial wave of foundational IP has matured and the field may be approaching a consolidation phase where incremental improvements and clinical translation dominate over broad platform claiming. Teams should scrutinize freedom-to-operate carefully before entering core scaffold and conduit spaces.
Lifecycle: DeclineModerate concentration with a competitive top tier
The top five filers hold 25% of the combined total among the hundred largest filers, and the difference between the leader and fifth-ranked applicant is only six patent records. This relatively flat distribution means no single entity controls the field, but it also means a new entrant must file strategically to carve out defensible territory rather than attempting broad coverage. The mix of commercial and academic top filers creates partnership opportunities as well as competitive pressure.
Moderate concentrationMochida Pharmaceutical and Tazuke Kofukai anchor the most active co-filing partnerships
The most active co-filing pair is Tazuke Kofukai and Mochida Pharmaceutical, with 10 joint records, followed by the University of Zurich and ETH Zurich with 9, and Mochida Pharmaceutical with Tazuke Kofukai’s affiliated foundation (Zaidan Hojin Tazuke Kofukai) with 8. These clusters reveal two distinct collaboration hubs: a Japanese clinical-academic network centered on Mochida and a Swiss research university alliance. Organizations seeking co-development partnerships could target either hub or identify under-served US academic groups.
Two active hubsUS-centric filing with meaningful European and PCT coverage
The United States is the leading jurisdiction with 98 patent records, followed by Europe (EPO) with 67 and WIPO PCT with 45. China has 43 records, placing it on par with PCT and above all other national offices. Secondary markets including Australia, Canada, South Korea, and India each have single-digit to low-double-digit records, suggesting limited enforcement footprints outside the core US-Europe-China triangle. For commercial licensing or freedom-to-operate analysis, those three jurisdictions warrant the deepest investigation.
US–Europe–China triangleGo beyond the landscape: Eureka’s TRIZ Solution agent breaks down an R&D problem and returns patented concept solutions, each with a technical approach and cited patent & literature evidence.
| Applicant | Collaborator | Co-filings |
|---|---|---|
| TAZUKE KOFUKAI | Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 10 |
| University of Zurich | ETH Zurich | 9 |
| Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | Zaidan Hojin Tazuke Kofukai | 8 |
| Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | Shimane University | 1 |
| Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | Nara Institute of Science and Technology | 1 |
| TAZUKE KOFUKAI | Nara Institute of Science and Technology | 1 |
| TAZUKE KOFUKAI | Zaidan Hojin Tazuke Kofukai | 1 |
Co-filing pairs, ranked by the number of jointly-filed patent families.
Mochida Pharmaceutical leads by volume; University of Zurich anchors academic depth
The top two ranked filers represent distinct strategic profiles: a Japanese pharmaceutical company with a clinical-biomaterials focus and a European research university with a broad peptide-scaffold-medicinal preparations platform. Both are reported as new entrants in recent-period momentum data, indicating their current corpus derives predominantly from earlier filing cohorts.
Mochida Pharmaceutical
Mochida Pharmaceutical leads with 19 patent records, concentrated in A61L 27 (biomaterials for implants), A61P 25 (neurological therapeutic activity), and A61P 43 (systemic therapeutic activity). Its collaboration with Tazuke Kofukai (10 joint records) and the Zaidan Hojin Tazuke Kofukai foundation (8 joint records) shows a tightly integrated clinical-academic network. Momentum data classifies the company as a new entrant in the most recent filing window, suggesting its current portfolio was built in earlier periods.
patent records: 19University of Zurich
The University of Zurich holds 18 patent records, with equal emphasis across A61K 47 (medicinal preparations), A61L 27 (biomaterials), and C07K 14 (structural proteins and peptides), reflecting a multidisciplinary platform spanning drug delivery, scaffolding, and bioactive molecule design. Its 9-record co-filing partnership with ETH Zurich gives it additional reach into condensation polymer and protein engineering spaces. Like Mochida, it appears as a new entrant in recent-period data, indicating its filing activity was concentrated in prior years.
patent records: 18| Applicant | Recent (3 yrs) | Trend |
|---|---|---|
| Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 1 | ▲ new entrant |
| Integra LifeSciences Corp. | 1 | ▲ new entrant |
| Tulavi Therapeutics Inc. | 5 | ▲ new entrant |
| Rutgers University | 5 | ▲ new entrant |
| Board of Regents, The University of Texas System | 1 | ▲ new entrant |
Electrotherapy, polymer engineering, and 3D printing are under-served adjacent branches
Several IPC branches appear in the neural tissue engineering corpus at low counts relative to the dominant A61L biomaterials class. These are observations of relative sparsity; where they combine plausible technical value with a realistic entry path, they may warrant closer investigation.
A61N · Electrotherapy & radiation therapy
With only 20 patent records across the full corpus, electrical stimulation-based approaches to neural tissue regeneration are sparsely covered despite growing scientific evidence that electrical cues guide neurite outgrowth. Tulavi Therapeutics already holds a notable position in A61N 7, demonstrating that at least one commercial entrant sees value here. An organization with expertise in conductive biomaterials or implantable electrode design could find room to build a defensible position before the space fills.
Search this in Eureka →B33Y · Additive manufacturing (3D printing)
Only 4 patent records reference B33Y (additive manufacturing), making 3D-printed neural scaffolds one of the sparsest branches in the corpus despite the broad scientific literature on bioprinting for nerve guides. The top-cited patent on biodegradable conducting polymers and the multi-lumen guidance channel patents suggest that scaffold architecture is technically important, yet the 3D-printing route to fabricating such architectures is nearly unclaimed in this dataset. Teams with bioprinting or extrusion expertise could explore this adjacency, though the small count may also reflect indexing conventions rather than a complete absence of activity.
Search this in Eureka →How leading applicants differ by technology route
Route coverage across the main technology branches in the current evidence set.
| Player | A61L 27 · Sterilising & disinfecting | A61F 2 · Implants & prostheses | C12N 5 · Microorganisms & genetic engineering | A61B 17 · Diagnosis & surgery | A61P 25 · Therapeutic activity of compounds |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Mochida Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | Strong · 19 | Absent | Absent | Absent | Strong · 11 |
| University of Zurich | Strong · 16 | Absent | Strong · 11 | Absent | Absent |
| University of Utah Research Foundation | Strong · 10 | Strong · 8 | Absent | Strong · 9 | Absent |
| Integra LifeSciences Corp. | Strong · 15 | Absent | Absent | Strong · 9 | Absent |
| ETH Zurich | Strong · 11 | Absent | Strong · 8 | Absent | Absent |
| University of Florida Research Foundation Inc. | Strong · 10 | Strong · 9 | Absent | Absent | Absent |
| Tulavi Therapeutics Inc. | Strong · 14 | Absent | Absent | Moderate · 4 | Absent |
Frequently asked questions
The dataset covers 167 patent families in scope. The United States leads as the primary filing jurisdiction with 98 patent records, followed by Europe (EPO) with 67 and WIPO PCT with 45.
Mochida Pharmaceutical leads with 19 patent records, followed by the University of Zurich with 18, Tulavi Therapeutics Inc. with 17, Integra LifeSciences Corp. with 16, and Rutgers University with 13. The top five together account for 25% of the combined total among the hundred largest filers.
Annual filings peaked in 2017 at 28 records and have eased since. A partial rebound occurred in 2021. Recent years (2024–2026) appear low due to publication lag and will likely be revised upward as pending applications publish.
A61L (biomaterials for implants and sterilising) is the dominant class, reflecting the centrality of scaffold and conduit materials. A61K (medicinal preparations), A61F (implants and prostheses), C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering), and A61B (diagnosis and surgery) form a substantial secondary tier.
The most active co-filing partnerships are Tazuke Kofukai with Mochida Pharmaceutical (10 joint records), the University of Zurich with ETH Zurich (9 joint records), and Mochida Pharmaceutical with the Zaidan Hojin Tazuke Kofukai foundation (8 joint records). Two distinct hubs are visible: a Japanese clinical-academic network and a Swiss research university alliance.
A61N (electrotherapy and radiation therapy) and B33Y (additive manufacturing/3D printing) are among the sparsest branches relative to the dominant A61L class, with 20 and 4 patent records respectively. C08L (polymer compositions) and C12M (bioreactors) also have low counts. These represent observations of relative sparsity and may warrant closer analysis for organizations with relevant technical capabilities.
Ready to map your own neural tissue engineering landscape?
Join 18,000+ innovators using PatSnap Eureka to map any technology landscape: search 2B+ patents and papers, surface key assignees, and generate a report like this in minutes.
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.