Ophthalmic Drug Delivery Implants Patents: Leaders & Trends 2026
- Concentration at the top. The leading assignee alone accounts for 551 of 2,462 records, and the top 5 combined hold 39.0% of all records in scope.
- Filings cooled after a 2021 peak. Filings rose to 202 in 2021, then fell to 97 by 2024 — a 52% decline over that three-year span, the most recent period the trend can be read as complete.
- Claim space is dense but narrow. 80.2% of records sit in A61K (medicinal preparations), while device-side classes like A61M and A61L each cover under 8% of records — a gap between formulation and delivery-hardware claims.
Filing growth compares 2021 (202 records) with 2024 (97) — 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 2,462 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Ophthalmic drug delivery implants sit at the intersection of formulation chemistry and ocular device engineering: biodegradable matrices, sustained-release microspheres, and intravitreal hardware designed to hold a therapeutic dose in the eye for weeks or months rather than days. The 2,462 records in this dataset span filings from 2015 through the 2026 data cut-off, drawn from a search built around sustained release, needle gauge, biodegradable matrix, intraocular pressure, dosing interval and implant migration — the technical vocabulary that separates a drug-delivery implant claim from a general ophthalmic device or a general sustained-release formulation claim.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent one or two years in any trend line will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be. The filing trend and growth figures on this page are read against 2024 as the last complete year for that reason.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,462-record corpus: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
A 2021 peak followed by a real pullback
Filings climbed from 164 in 2017 to a peak of 202 in 2021, then declined to 97 by 2024 — a 52% drop across that span. 2025 and 2026 figures are still filling in as publications catch up with filing dates, so they should not yet be read as a continued fall.
Formulation claims dominate; device claims are comparatively thin
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears on 80.2% of the 2,462 records, with A61P (therapeutic activity) on 36.1% and C07K (peptides & proteins) on 19.3%. Device-oriented classes are smaller by comparison: A61F (implants & prostheses) at 17.2%, A61M (devices for body fluids) at 7.2%, and A61L (sterilising & disinfecting) at just 3.8% — records can carry multiple classes, so these figures sum to more than the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,462 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Ophthalmic Drug Delivery Implants with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about ophthalmic drug delivery implants and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe most-cited records in this space
Intraocular sustained release drug delivery systems and methods for treating ocular conditions (NZ595294A)
The filing discloses a pharmaceutical composition of sustained-release biodegradable microspheres, 30 to 100 microns in diameter, comprising 10 to 30 weight percent of an anti-hypertensive agent such as latanoprost, bimatoprost or travoprost, and 70 to 90 weight percent of a biodegradable polymer such as PLGA or PLA. The microspheres are designed to release the agent over roughly 10 to 120 days.Filed by Allergan, Inc.; a representative example of the microsphere-based sustained-release claims that anchor much of the surrounding prior art.
View full record| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6713081B2 | Ocular therapeutic agent delivery devices and methods for making and using such devices | 492 |
| 2 | US20050244469A1 | Extended therapeutic effect ocular implant treatments | 301 |
| 3 | US20060182783A1 | Sustained release intraocular drug delivery systems | 272 |
| 4 | US20050281861A1 | Macromolecule-containing sustained release intraocular implants and related methods | 252 |
| 5 | US20070059336A1 | Anti-angiogenic sustained release intraocular implants and related methods | 222 |
| 6 | US20080107694A1 | Sustained release intraocular drug delivery systems comprising a water soluble therapeutic agent and a releas… | 213 |
| 7 | US20080220049A1 | Compositions and methods for intraocular delivery of fibronectin scaffold domain proteins | 197 |
| 8 | US7306799B2 | Use of VEGF inhibitors for treatment of eye disorders | 193 |
| 9 | US20030175324A1 | Ocular therapeutic agent delivery devices and methods for making and using such devices | 176 |
| 10 | US8512738B2 | Biodegradable intravitreal tyrosine kinase implants | 156 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and are skewed toward older filings — treat them as a signal of prior-art weight, not of 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 data actually indicates
Three readings of the same corpus that matter for a filing decision: where activity has concentrated, how citation weight is distributed, and how collaboration patterns cluster.
A dense top of the field, a long tail below it
The leading assignee alone holds 551 records, more than six times the fifth-place holder's 85. That gap between first place and the rest of the ranked leaders means the field's core formulation and microsphere claims are held tightly by a small number of originators, while the tail of the ranking is made up of far thinner filing positions.
Activity has pulled back from its 2021 peak
Filings rose steadily to 202 in 2021, then dropped to 97 by 2024. Several of the historically largest filers show sharp year-over-year declines into the latest year, though 2025-2026 figures are still incomplete and should not be read as the field ending.
Formulation claims crowd the field; hardware claims do not
Medicinal-preparation claims under A61K cover the large majority of records, while device-for-body-fluids claims under A61M sit far lower. That imbalance suggests delivery-hardware and administration-mechanism claims are comparatively less contested than the drug formulations they carry.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to ophthalmic drug delivery implants, with the prior art for and against each one.
The assignee landscape
A ranking of 100 companies drawn from the full 2,462-record set. The picture is one of early concentration by a handful of originators, with most of the ranked field holding single-digit or low double-digit counts.
One assignee well ahead of the rest
The top-ranked assignee's count is more than six times that of the fifth-place holder (85), pointing to an early and durable filing position built around sustained-release microsphere and implant formulation claims.
A small group holds well over a third of the field
The top five assignees combined account for 39.0% of all 2,462 records, and the top ten extend that to 53.6%. Anyone filing new claims in the core formulation space is filing against that concentrated prior art first.
Some of the largest historic filers have gone quiet
Several assignees that built large historic positions show zero filings in the latest year or year-over-year declines above 80%. That pattern is consistent with a maturing core claim set rather than continued expansion by the same players.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Ocular Therapeutix, Inc. | 2 | -82% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 1 | -83% |
| Allergan, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Clearside Biomedical, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Research Development Foundation | 0 | — |
| Orion Ophthalmology LLC | 0 | — |
| OMEGA OPHTHALMICS LLC | 0 | — |
| University of Iowa Research Foundation | 0 | — |
Turning this landscape into a filing decision
The figures above describe where the field has been. The next step is testing a specific claim idea, a freedom-to-operate question, or a target assignee against the full record set.
Test a claim against the crowded core
Formulation claims under A61K carry the heaviest prior art in this dataset. Before drafting in that space, check a proposed claim against the most-cited records and the leading assignees' active families.
Explore this topic in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches
Device-hardware classes such as A61M and A61L carry comparatively low record counts relative to A61K. That gap is worth investigating for a first-mover filing position.
Run a white space search in EurekaCommon questions about this landscape
One assignee leads the ranked field clearly, holding 551 of the 2,462 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 85. The top five assignees combined account for 39.0% of all records, and the top ten reach 53.6%. That concentration is built mainly on sustained-release microsphere and biodegradable-matrix formulation claims, so a new entrant working in that specific space should expect to file against a small number of dominant prior-art holders rather than a fragmented field.
Filings rose from 164 in 2017 to a peak of 202 in 2021, then declined to 97 by 2024, a 52% drop over that three-year span. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in any such dataset are still incomplete and should not be read as evidence the field is shrinking further. Based on the complete years available, activity has cooled meaningfully from its 2021 high point.
Medicinal preparation claims under IPC class A61K appear on 80.2% of the 2,462 records, making formulation chemistry the dominant claim type in this field. Therapeutic-activity claims (A61P) and peptide and protein claims (C07K) follow at 36.1% and 19.3% respectively. Device-oriented classes such as implants and prostheses (A61F, 17.2%), body-fluid devices (A61M, 7.2%) and sterilising methods (A61L, 3.8%) are comparatively thin, indicating device-hardware claims are less contested than the drug payloads they deliver.
NZ595294A, assigned to Allergan, Inc., discloses a sustained-release biodegradable microsphere composition sized between roughly 30 and 100 microns, loaded with 10 to 30 weight percent of an anti-hypertensive agent such as latanoprost, bimatoprost or travoprost, in a PLGA or PLA polymer matrix, releasing the drug over about 10 to 120 days. Anyone working with microsphere-based sustained release of similar anti-hypertensive agents in that size and loading range should review this filing and its family closely, since it sits among the most-cited prior art in this dataset. Formulations using different polymer chemistries, different agent classes, or delivery mechanisms outside the microsphere format face a narrower overlap with these specific claim elements.
The clearest gap in this dataset sits between formulation and hardware: A61K formulation claims cover 80.2% of records while device-side classes like A61M and A61L cover under 8% each. That imbalance points toward under-claimed areas in delivery-hardware design, such as needle-gauge-specific administration, implant migration resistance, and coating sterilisation methods, where filing density is comparatively low relative to the crowded formulation core. A first claim in one of these branches would need to tie a specific structural or process feature to an ocular delivery outcome, rather than reasserting formulation chemistry that is already densely claimed.
Research Ophthalmic Drug Delivery Implants in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole ophthalmic drug delivery implants 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.