Point-of-Care Testing Patents: Who Leads, Filing Trends 2026
- Filing has plateaued, not grown. Filings peaked at 24 in 2021 and sat at 19 by the 2022 midpoint, with 2026 figures not yet reflecting the full filing-to-publication lag.
- Readout hardware dominates the cited prior art. The five most-cited records in the dataset are all optoelectronic or handheld reader systems, with one 2005-era filing cited 189 times.
- No assignee shows momentum in the latest year. Every tracked assignee, including established diagnostics names, records zero filings in the most recent year — a sign the field is between cycles, not abandoned.
Filing growth compares 2021 (24 records) with 2024 (1) — 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 182 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this dataset covers
This landscape draws on 182 patent families published between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine point-of-care testing terminology with claim language on lateral flow, sample preparation, sensitivity/specificity, readout devices or shelf stability, filed under G01N33, B01L3 and G01N21. The scope is deliberately narrow to the device and assay mechanics rather than the broader diagnostics category, so the counts here are a slice of point-of-care activity, not the whole field.
Filing activity is concentrated in the United States and Europe, with the WIPO PCT route used heavily for international coverage. The technology composition skews toward core material-analysis claims, with a meaningful secondary cluster in lab apparatus and enzymatic/molecular testing, and a smaller but present overlap with digital processing and connectivity claims — evidence that reader hardware and app-connected devices are a distinct sub-thread within the category.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 182-family dataset: the year-by-year filing count, and the IPC subclasses those filings actually claim into.
A flat-to-declining filing curve
Filings ran at 21 in 2017, rose to a peak of 24 in 2021, and had fallen to 19 by the 2022 midpoint. Because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-2026 tail understates real activity, but the multi-year plateau before that tail is real and suggests the core lateral-flow and readout claims are largely staked out.
G01N carries the field; C12Q and B01L trail
G01N (material analysis and testing) appears in 173 of 182 records, confirming this is fundamentally an assay-chemistry and detection-method dataset. B01L (lab apparatus, 38) and C12Q (enzyme/DNA-based testing, 37) form a secondary cluster around sample handling and molecular assays, while G06F, H04M, H04W and G06K together point to a smaller but distinct thread of connected-reader and data-handling claims layered on top of the core assay.
Shares are the percentage of the 182 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Point-of-Care Testing Devices with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about point-of-care testing devices and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe prior art shaping this space
Method of selecting analyte to samples using a lateral flow device (US10598656B2)
Lateral flow devices and methods of use for a molecular diagnostic assay are provided. The method is suitable for detection or monitoring of targets, including biological, chemical, and material targets that exist in very low concentrations in biological samples. The methods and devices of the present application are amenable to power source-free point of care testing.Filed by Credo Biomedical Pte Ltd; granted 2020-03-24.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20050221504A1 | Optoelectronic rapid diagnostic test system | 189 |
| 2 | US20130203043A1 | Portable rapid diagnostic test reader | 143 |
| 3 | US20120123686A1 | Handheld diagnostic test device and method for use with an electronic device and a test cartridge in a rapid … | 71 |
| 4 | US20150056719A1 | Universal Rapid Diagnostic Test Reader with Trans-Visual Sensitivity | 70 |
| 5 | US20050221505A1 | Optoelectronic rapid diagnostic test system | 61 |
| 6 | US20150111201A1 | Portable rapid diagnostic test reader and methods of using the same | 54 |
| 7 | US8916390B2 | Portable rapid diagnostic test reader | 50 |
| 8 | EP1582598A1 | Optoelectronic rapid diagnostic test system | 44 |
| 9 | WO2000062060A2 | Method for detection of analytes in urine using lateral flow hybrid device | 44 |
| 10 | US10968493B1 | Rapid diagnostic test using colorimetric LAMP | 34 |
Citation counts reflect influence within this searched corpus and favour older filings; they are not a measure 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 means for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once the raw counts are read against filing dates and claim scope.
The peak has passed, not arrived
Filings peaked in 2021 and had already softened to 19 by the 2022 midpoint. Combined with a zero-filing latest year across every tracked assignee, this reads as a maturing claim landscape rather than an emerging one — new entrants are more likely to be designing around existing claims than opening new ground.
Readout hardware anchors the prior art
The five most-cited records are all optoelectronic or handheld reader systems, one dating to 2005 and cited 189 times. Any new reader-hardware filing needs freedom-to-operate analysis against this cluster specifically, since it is where examiners and competitors alike will look first.
US and EPO carry the bulk of coverage
The United States accounts for 68 filings and Europe 33, with WIPO PCT used for 26 — a filing pattern typical of diagnostics companies protecting core home markets before selective national phase entry. China, at 5 filings, is comparatively thin given the size of its diagnostics manufacturing base.
Connectivity claims are a minority thread
G06F, H04M, H04W and G06K together cover a modest share of records, meaning connected-reader and app-linked claims exist but are not yet the field's centre of gravity. That gap is where device-side differentiation still has room to move.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to point-of-care testing devices, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the claim space
Co-assignee pairings are sparse — only 10 pairs across the dataset, most linking a single company to named inventors rather than to other corporate assignees. That points to a field of largely independent filers rather than joint-development consortia.
No one is currently pulling ahead
Every named assignee in the momentum data, from established diagnostics manufacturers to smaller biomedical filers, shows zero filings in the most recent tracked year. Read alongside the 2021 peak, this suggests a pause in the filing cycle across the field rather than one competitor losing ground to another.
Filing is mostly solo, not joint
With only 10 co-assignee pairs identified and the strongest pairings appearing just twice, most patent families in this dataset are filed by a single corporate assignee with named inventors, not through multi-company collaboration. Partnership-driven IP strategy is the exception here, not the norm.
Coverage concentrates in three offices
The United States, EPO and WIPO PCT together account for the large majority of filings, with India, Canada and China each in single or low double digits. A filer entering this space should expect the competitive prior art to be denser in US and European claim language than in Chinese-language filings.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Feiao Company | 0 | — |
| Credo Biomedical Pte Ltd | 0 | — |
| Zhencha Company | 0 | — |
| New England Biolabs | 0 | — |
| Ortho Clinical Diagnostics | 0 | — |
| Inmicrospring Ltd. | 0 | — |
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | — |
| DNT Research LLC | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, white-space filing, or competitive tracking.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on reader hardware
Any new optoelectronic or handheld reader concept should be checked against the top-cited records in this dataset before drafting claims, since that cluster anchors the field's prior art.
Explore reader hardware prior art in EurekaMap the connectivity-claim overlap
The overlap between core assay claims and digital-processing or wireless subclasses is thin relative to the core, and worth a dedicated search before committing to a smartphone-linked or connected-cartridge filing strategy.
Search connected-device overlap in EurekaTrack assignee filing cadence going forward
With every tracked assignee at zero filings in the latest year, a renewed filing wave from any single competitor would be an early signal worth catching quickly.
Set up assignee monitoring in EurekaCommon questions on point-of-care testing patents
The dataset shows filings rising to a peak of 24 in 2021 before falling to 19 by the 2022 midpoint, and this pattern typically follows a period of intense claim activity around a specific technology wave, in this case likely tied to pandemic-era rapid diagnostic test development. Once core lateral-flow and reader-device mechanics are claimed by early movers, later filers face a narrower window for novel claims, which naturally slows the filing rate. It is worth noting that publication lags filing by around 18 months, so the most recent years in any such dataset will always look thinner than they eventually turn out to be once the backlog clears.
The most-cited records in this dataset are dominated by optoelectronic and handheld reader systems, with one filing from 2005 cited 189 times and others in the 60-140 citation range. These are the filings most likely to have been cited by examiners against later applications in the same space, making them the logical starting point for any freedom-to-operate search on reader hardware. Citation count is a signal of influence within the searched corpus rather than a guarantee of current enforceability, so a full legal-status check on each is still necessary.
Yes, though it sits at the edges rather than in the core mechanism. The core lateral-flow and sample-preparation claims covered by G01N and B01L are heavily filed, but thinner areas include power-source-free readout circuits, multiplexed sample preparation across several analytes in one device, and shelf-stability formulation claims specifically. Connectivity-layer claims, such as smartphone-linked interpretation or wireless cartridge tracking, also remain a smaller share of the dataset relative to the core assay claims, suggesting more room to differentiate there than in the base chemistry.
The dataset's assignee ranking includes a mix of dedicated diagnostics companies and biomedical filers, but no single assignee shows filing activity in the most recent tracked year, which makes it hard to point to one clear current leader. Historically influential filers are better identified through the most-cited records, which are concentrated in reader-device hardware rather than assay chemistry. Anyone tracking this space competitively should watch for a renewed filing wave from any of the established names, since the flat recent-year data may reflect a pause rather than an exit.
US10598656B2, assigned to Credo Biomedical Pte Ltd and granted in March 2020, covers a method of selecting analyte samples using a lateral flow device for molecular diagnostic assays, with specific relevance to power-source-free point-of-care testing. Anyone developing a lateral flow device that performs analyte selection without an external power source should review this claim scope carefully, since it sits directly in that mechanism. It does not block lateral flow devices generally, but the specific combination of analyte-selection method and power-source-free operation is claimed territory that needs a design-around or licensing conversation.
Research Point-of-Care Testing Devices in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole point-of-care testing devices 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.