Plasmapheresis Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 32.0% of all filings sit with five companies, yet a long tail of 95 further ranked assignees still holds meaningful share — this is concentrated, not closed.
- Filings fell 45% from 2021 to 2024, the last year the dataset can treat as complete, after peaking in 2019 at 188 records.
- Device claims dominate over biologics claims, with body-fluid handling (A61M) present in 49.8% of records against 13.9% for peptide and protein composition (C07K).
Filing growth compares 2021 (128 records) with 2024 (71) — 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 2,125 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This landscape maps 2,125 patent records published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine plasmapheresis or source plasma collection with a second layer of claims covering donor screening, collection frequency, device throughput, anticoagulant citrate dosing, donor safety or plasma volume. That second filter separates the field from generic apheresis hardware patents and keeps the scope centred on the operational and safety mechanics of running a collection programme, not just the plumbing. A61M devices for body fluids and A61K medicinal preparations are the two largest classes, which tells you claims in this space split fairly evenly between the collection hardware and what gets done with the plasma afterward.
Coverage spans the major receiving offices, with United States filings ahead of Europe, WIPO/PCT, Australia, Canada and Israel. That spread matters for freedom-to-operate work: a claim cleared in one office carries no weight in another, and this dataset shows filers pursuing multi-jurisdiction protection rather than concentrating in a single market.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 2,125 records: filing activity by year, and the IPC subclasses those filings claim into. Both are drawn from the full dataset in scope — no filtering applied beyond the search string above.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Annual filings ran from 143 in 2017 to a peak of 188 in 2019, then declined to 4 in 2026 (a partial year). The cleaner comparison is 2021 to 2024, complete years both, which shows a 45% drop from 128 to 71 filings. Treat 2025 and 2026 as still filling in — publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years understate real filing activity rather than proving a slowdown.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61M (devices for body fluids) appears in 49.8% of the 2,125 records, followed by A61K (medicinal preparations) at 43.7%, A61P (therapeutic activity) at 19.7%, G01N (material analysis and testing) at 16.5%, C07K (peptides and proteins) at 13.9%, B01D (separation processes) at 12.9%, C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) at 10.1%, and A61B (diagnosis and surgery) at 4.7%. Records commonly carry more than one class, so these figures sum above 100% by design.
Shares are the percentage of the 2,125 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Plasmapheresis and Source Plasma Collection with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about plasmapheresis and source plasma collection and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
Compositions and methods for plasmapheresis (US20230380687A1)
Described herein are compositions and methods for performing plasmapheresis. The compositions and methods for performing plasmapheresis are innovative at least in their application towards the treatment and prevention of aging and conditions associated with aging. Plasmapheresis compositions and methods described herein are directed towards reducing or eliminating conditions associated with aging.Filed by Circulate Health, published 2023-11-30. It illustrates a shift in claim framing from collection hardware toward the downstream therapeutic use of collected plasma, in this case anti-aging applications.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20070215545A1 | Extracorporeal renal replacement modeling system | 327 |
| 2 | WO2012115885A1 | Circulating biomarkers | 315 |
| 3 | US20050013870A1 | Decellularized extracellular matrix of conditioned body tissues and uses thereof | 292 |
| 4 | US5034135A | Blood fractionation system and method | 250 |
| 5 | US4755300A | Couette membrane filtration apparatus for separating suspended components in a fluid medium using high shear | 236 |
| 6 | WO2011127219A1 | Circulating biomarkers for disease | 232 |
| 7 | US4530691A | Centrifuge with movable mandrel | 232 |
| 8 | US6562616B1 | Methods and devices for cell culturing and organ assist systems | 223 |
| 9 | WO2016183482A1 | Membrane-receiver complex therapeutics | 222 |
| 10 | US5376263A | Pump control apparatus for cellular filtration systems employing rotating microporous membranes | 221 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside the corpus — read them as a signal of influence on the field, 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 numbers mean for filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once volume, concentration and class composition are read together.
Leadership is real but not closed
The top five assignees combined hold 32.0% of all 2,125 records in scope, rising to 43.8% for the top ten. That leaves well over half the field spread across 90 further ranked assignees plus unranked filers, which is a wider base than the headline concentration figure suggests on its own.
Volume is down from a 2019 peak
Filings peaked at 188 in 2019 and fell to 71 by 2024, a 45% decline over the most recent three complete years. Recent-year momentum data for several named assignees shows year-on-year drops to zero filings, consistent with a maturing claim landscape rather than a single company's retreat.
Hardware claims outnumber biologics claims
A61M (devices for body fluids) covers 49.8% of records against 13.9% for C07K (peptides and proteins). The gap suggests that collection and separation hardware remains the denser prior-art zone, while composition-of-matter claims tied to the collected plasma itself have more open space per record.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to plasmapheresis and source plasma collection, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the field is still open
The ranking covers 100 companies counted by patent family. It is not a top-50 or top-100 cut by volume threshold — it is the full ranked list the dataset returns, and it still leaves room below the leaders.
A single filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 219 records against 70 for the fifth-ranked company and 41 for the tenth, a steep drop-off that marks this as a field with one dominant filer rather than a tight cluster at the top.
A workable mid-tier exists below the leader
Between fifth and tenth place, record counts fall from 70 to 41 — a gentler slope than the drop from first to fifth. That mid-tier is where licensing and freedom-to-operate negotiations are most likely to be multi-party rather than single-counterparty.
Recent-year activity has cooled across named leaders
Several of the most active historical filers show year-on-year filing drops of 94% to 100% in the latest year of data. Combined with the 2021-2024 decline, this points to a field where core claim positions have largely been staked rather than one where any single company is quietly stepping back.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Velico Medical, Inc. | 1 | -94% |
| Eliaz Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Fenwal, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Baxter International Inc. | 0 | — |
| Cerus Corporation | 0 | -100% |
| Terumo BCT, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Eliaz Therapeutics, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Odenani Inc. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the question is offensive filing strategy or defensive freedom-to-operate.
Check freedom-to-operate on device claims first
A61M device claims cover the largest share of records at 49.8%, making this the densest zone for prior art searches before committing to hardware-focused filings.
Explore device claim landscapeTrack the mid-tier, not just the leader
With the top ten holding 43.8% of records and a steep drop after the leader, the mid-tier of ranked assignees is where competitive shifts are most likely to show up first.
Monitor assignee movementRevisit composition-of-matter claims
C07K peptide and protein claims sit at 13.9% of records, notably thinner than device claims, suggesting more open space for plasma-derived composition filings.
Review biologics white spaceCommon questions about this landscape
The ranked leader holds 219 of the 2,125 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked assignee at 70 and the tenth at 41. The top five assignees combined hold 32.0% of all records, and the top ten hold 43.8%. That leaves more than half the field distributed across the remaining ranked assignees, so a single-company dominance narrative would overstate how closed the space actually is.
Filings peaked in 2019 at 188 and declined to 71 by 2024, a 45% drop over that three-year span using the two most recent complete years. Years after 2024 in the dataset are still filling in because publication typically lags filing by about 18 months, so the apparent drop into 2025 and 2026 should not be read as an acceleration of the decline. The honest read is a field that grew through the late 2010s and has since pulled back from its peak.
Devices for handling body fluids (IPC class A61M) appear in 49.8% of the 2,125 records, the largest single category, followed by medicinal preparations (A61K) at 43.7%. Separation processes such as filtration (B01D) sit at 12.9%, and peptide or protein composition claims (C07K) at 13.9%, both notably thinner than the device classes. This split indicates that collection hardware is more densely claimed than what is subsequently done with the collected plasma.
The comparatively thin classes relative to A61M and A61K point toward specific operational mechanics: anticoagulant citrate dosing algorithms, donor-specific collection frequency limits, point-of-care plasma volume estimation, and automated donor eligibility screening. These sit inside the search scope but are covered by a smaller share of records than the core device and preparation classes, meaning claim space there is less occupied. That does not guarantee novelty against any single prior filing, but it does mean the density of competing claims is lower.
Moderately concentrated at the very top but with a substantial long tail. The top five assignees account for 32.0% of the 2,125 records in scope, and the top ten account for 43.8%, leaving the remaining 90 ranked assignees and any unranked filers to hold the rest. Recent-year momentum data also shows steep year-on-year declines among several of the most active historical filers, suggesting the leadership positions were built earlier rather than being actively contested in the latest filings.
Research Plasmapheresis and Source Plasma Collection in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole plasmapheresis and source plasma collection 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.