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 →https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/protac-design-and-linker-optimization-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Targeted Protein DegradationPROTAC Design and Linker Optimization Patents: Who Holds the Claims
- 49.4% concentration. The top five assignees combined hold 130 of 263 records in scope — just under half the field sits with a handful of filers.
- +11% filing growth, 2021 to 2024. Filings rose from 46 to 51 across the last complete three-year window, with 2024 the peak year so far at 51.
- 79.8% carry a medicinal-preparations class. A61K appears on 210 of 263 records, with C07D heterocyclic scaffolds close behind at 68.8% — claim density concentrates in composition and scaffold chemistry, not in downstream assay or measurement classes.
263
Published Records
49%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+11%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (46 records) with 2024 (51) — 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 263 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··6 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
This landscape tracks 263 patent records filed between 2015 and mid-2026 that combine bifunctional degrader chemistry — PROTAC molecules, E3 ligase ligands — with the specific engineering problems that determine whether a degrader works in practice: the hook effect, linker exit vector geometry, permeability, degradation potency, ubiquitination site accessibility and catalytic turnover. It is a narrower cut than 'PROTAC patents' generally; it isolates the design and optimization layer rather than target-specific degrader claims.
Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures in the trend chart are still filling in and should not be read as a slowdown. The most recent complete filing year is 2024.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization 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
Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 263 records: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims sit in.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings climbed from 12 in 2017 to a peak of 51 in 2024, up 11% from 46 in 2021 over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures are understated because publication has not caught up with filing.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61K (medicinal preparations) and C07D (heterocyclic compounds) dominate, appearing on 79.8% and 68.8% of records respectively, since most claims cover both a therapeutic composition and the scaffold chemistry that carries it. Records can carry several classes, so these shares sum to more than 100% of the 263 records in scope.
Shares are the percentage of the 263 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 PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about protac design and linker optimization and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Most-cited records and a representative filing
Representative filing
US20240239787A1 — Compounds for use in the treatment of cancer (Nanyang Technological University, 2024-07-18)
NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY
Discloses two compounds that combine to form a PROTAC molecule in situ — a compound of formula Ia and a compound of formula Ib, joined via defined linker and exit-vector elements (R1, R2, L1, L2, X and Y) described in the specification.Notable for claiming an in-situ assembly route rather than a pre-formed bifunctional molecule.
Highest-cited records in scope
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160045607A1 | Estrogen-related receptor alpha based protac compounds and associated methods of use | 352 |
| 2 | WO2016197114A1 | Tank-binding kinase-1 protacs and associated methods of use | 280 |
| 3 | WO2018119441A1 | EGFR proteolysis targeting chimeric molecules and associated methods of use | 231 |
| 4 | WO2018226542A1 | Modulators of proteolysis and associated methods of use | 166 |
| 5 | US20180147202A1 | TANK-BINDING KINASE-1 PROTACs AND ASSOCIATED METHODS OF USE | 141 |
| 6 | EP2985285A1 | Estrogen-related receptor alpha based protac compounds and associated methods of use | 86 |
| 7 | US20180193470A1 | EGFR proteolysis targeting chimeric molecules and associated methods of use | 75 |
| 8 | WO2020251971A1 | Smarca degraders and uses thereof | 58 |
| 9 | WO2020251972A1 | Smarca degraders and uses thereof | 45 |
| 10 | US20180353501A1 | Modulators of proteolysis and associated methods of use | 31 |
Citation counts favour older records in any searched corpus — treat them as a signal of influence within the field, not of current commercial importance.
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 PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization 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
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 a filing decision
Three patterns worth acting on before drafting new claims in this space.
Concentration
49.4% of 263 records
top five assignees
Half the field sits with a handful of filers
The top five assignees combined account for 130 of 263 records — just under half the field. The top ten extend that to 75.7%, meaning three-quarters of all filing activity traces back to a short list of companies and universities. A new entrant is not filing into open territory at the composition level; it is filing adjacent to dense prior art held by a small group.
Ranking covers 81 companies total, counted in records.
Growth
+11%, 2021→2024
three-year filing growth
Momentum is real but modest, not explosive
Filings grew from 46 in 2021 to 51 in 2024, the most recent year that can be treated as complete. That is steady growth rather than a surge, and it follows a build-up from 12 filings in 2017. Read the 2025-2026 dip as a publication-lag artefact, not a cooling field.
2024 is the peak filing year so far.
Claim geography
79.8% vs 15.2%
A61K vs C07K share
Composition claims crowd out peptide-based routes
A61K medicinal-preparation claims sit on 210 of 263 records and C07D heterocyclic claims on 181, while C07K peptide and protein claims appear on only 40 records — 15.2% of the field. Enzyme- and DNA-measurement classes (C12Q, G01N) are thinner still, each under 3%. The imbalance points to where claim space is occupied versus where it is still relatively open.
Shares are of all 263 records; a record can carry multiple classes.
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 protac design and linker optimization, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization 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 is filing, and where the momentum has cooled
Filing leadership is concentrated, but recent-year momentum tells a different story than cumulative rank.
Leader
36 records
leading assignee
One filer sits well ahead of fifth place
The leading assignee holds 36 records against 22 at fifth place and 11 at tenth — a steep drop-off rather than a gradual one, typical of a field anchored by an early mover with sustained follow-on filing.
Ranked across 81 companies total.
Momentum
-67% to -100% YoY
recent-year change, leading filers
Cumulative leaders show little to no latest-year activity
Several of the most prolific historical filers show sharp year-over-year drops in the latest year — one down 67%, others down to zero or -100%. Given the 18-month publication lag, this understates true recent activity, but the pattern is consistent enough across leaders to suggest a pause in fresh composition filing while earlier grants prosecute.
Latest-year figures are provisional due to publication lag.
Collaboration
10 co-assignee pairs
joint filings
University-biotech pairings anchor the strongest collaborations
Co-assignee activity is modest but concentrated: the strongest pairings link a university with an affiliated or spun-out biotech, and a separate university-pharma pairing appears further down the list. This mirrors the field's origin in academic E3-ligase and linker chemistry commercialised through dedicated degrader companies.
10 pairs identified across the dataset.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Kymera Therapeutics Inc | 1 | -67% |
| Cornell University | 0 | — |
| The Regents of the University of California | 0 | -100% |
| Yale University | 0 | -100% |
| AstraZeneca AB | 0 | -100% |
| Arvinas Inc | 0 | — |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute Inc | 0 | — |
| Arvinas Operations Inc | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization 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 next
The dataset points to specific follow-up questions rather than a single conclusion.
Map the linker-geometry claim space in detail
Exit vector and permeability claims are described qualitatively across many records; a claim-level breakdown of linker length, attachment chemistry and geometry would show which combinations are already occupied.
Explore linker claims in EurekaTrack the leading assignee's prosecution pipeline
A 36-record leader with recent-year momentum near zero may simply have pending continuations working through the system; pipeline tracking would clarify whether that is a pause or a real slowdown.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaWatch the co-assignee pairs for licensing signals
University-biotech co-filing pairs often precede exclusive licensing deals; the strongest pairs in this dataset are worth watching for downstream deal activity.
Track collaboration signals in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization 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 PROTAC design patents
Fairly concentrated at the top. The five leading assignees combined hold 130 of the 263 records in scope, or 49.4% of the field, and the top ten extend that to 75.7%. That leaves a long tail: the ranking covers 81 companies in total, with most holding only a handful of records each. A new filer should expect dense prior art near the leaders and comparatively open ground further down the ranking.
Filing activity grew from 46 records in 2021 to 51 in 2024, an 11% increase over that three-year window, with 2024 the highest filing year recorded so far. The 2025 and 2026 counts appear lower, but that reflects the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication rather than an actual drop in activity. Treat any apparent decline in the most recent one to two years as incomplete data, not a trend.
The dominant classes are A61K (medicinal preparations), present on 79.8% of the 263 records, and C07D (heterocyclic compounds), on 68.8%. A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) appears on 47.9% of records. Peptide- and protein-based claims under C07K are comparatively rare at 15.2%, and enzyme- or DNA-based measurement classes such as C12Q sit under 2%, marking those as thinner areas of the claim landscape.
Based on IPC composition, the thinnest areas relative to the core composition claims are peptide/protein-based degrader architectures (C07K, 15.2% of records), enzyme- and DNA-based potency or turnover measurement methods (C12Q, 1.5%), and non-carbon organo-metallic E3 ligands (C07F, 1.1%). These are not necessarily easier to reduce to practice, but the filing density around them is much lower than around core small-molecule composition claims, which is where most of the crowding sits.
The field is led by a mix of dedicated degrader-focused biotechs and research universities with academic origins in E3-ligase and linker chemistry, several of which co-file with affiliated spin-out companies. The leading assignee holds 36 of the 263 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 22 and tenth place at 11 — a steep concentration rather than an even spread. Recent-year filing activity has slowed sharply for several of the most prolific historical filers, though this may partly reflect publication lag rather than an actual pullback.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization 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 PROTAC Design and Linker Optimization in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole protac design and linker optimization 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.