Protein & Peptide Therapeutics Patents: Top Companies & Trends 2026
- Concentration is modest at the top: the leading assignee holds 2,816 records, but the top 10 combined account for only 21.3% of the 63,854 records in scope — this is a field with a long tail, not a closed shop.
- Filing has pulled back from its peak: 2022 was the high point at 1,172 filings; from 2021 to 2024 (the last complete year) filings fell 38%, from 1,080 to 665.
- Medicinal preparations and peptide chemistry dominate the claim mix: A61K and C07K each cover roughly a fifth of all records, while measurement and enzymatic-synthesis classes trail well behind.
Filing growth compares 2021 (1,080 records) with 2024 (665) — 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 63,854 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset tracks patent filings at the intersection of therapeutic protein and peptide compositions and the analytical and formulation work that supports them — sequence reads, molecular target identification, expression level measurement, biomarkers, dosage composition and binding assays. It spans 63,854 published records filed between 2015 and the 2026 data cut-off, drawing on filings routed through the US, WIPO, EPO, Australia and Canada among other receiving offices.
Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the most recent years in the trend understate real filing activity; 2024 is treated here as the last complete year for growth comparisons.
How filings and claim classes have moved
The filing curve and the IPC breakdown together show a field that expanded through the early 2020s, peaked, and has since cooled from that peak — while claim density stays heaviest in formulation and core protein/peptide chemistry rather than in analytics.
Filings rose to a 2022 peak, then pulled back
Annual filings climbed from 802 in 2017 to a peak of 1,172 in 2022, then declined to 665 by 2024 — a 38% drop from the 2021 level of 1,080 over that three-year span. Readings for 2025 and 2026 are still incomplete due to publication lag and should not be read as a continuation of the decline.
A61K and C07K anchor the claim space
Medicinal preparations (A61K, 21.1% of records) and peptides & proteins (C07K, 19.7%) are the two most heavily claimed subclasses, followed closely by microorganisms and genetic engineering (C12N, 17.4%). Therapeutic activity classification (A61P) and analytical classes such as G01N, C12P, C12Q and C07H each sit in the mid-to-low single digits, indicating that most competitive pressure is on composition and expression rather than on measurement methods.
Shares are the percentage of the 63,854 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Protein & Peptide Therapeutics Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about protein & peptide therapeutics patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaA recent filing shows where the frontier sits
Plasmid DNA constructs for therapeutic protein expression (US20250281646A1)
The disclosure is directed to compositions that comprise a plasmid DNA construct having a DNA sequencing encoding a therapeutic protein, or a fragment thereof, in vivo, along with methods of generating and manufacturing the antibody or therapeutic protein, as well as methods for preventing and/or treating a disease in a patient.Filed by Renbio, Inc. and published 2025-09-11, this filing illustrates a continuing push toward in vivo expression constructs as an alternative to recombinant protein manufacturing.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6602684B1 | Glycosylation engineering of antibodies for improving antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity | 4,637 |
| 2 | WO1999054342A1 | Glycosylation engineering of antibodies for improving antibody-dependent cellular cytotoxicity | 3,561 |
| 3 | WO2010077634A1 | Anti-PD-l1 antibodies and their use to enhance t-cell function | 2,975 |
| 4 | US8217149B2 | Anti-PD-L1 antibodies, compositions and articles of manufacture | 2,598 |
| 5 | WO2000037504A2 | Human monoclonal antibodies to CTLA-4 | 1,946 |
| 6 | US6682736B1 | Human monoclonal antibodies to CTLA-4 | 1,588 |
| 7 | US5641670A | Protein production and protein delivery | 1,103 |
| 8 | WO2001014387A1 | 28-epirapalogs | 812 |
| 9 | WO2001077137A1 | Albumin fusion proteins | 811 |
| 10 | WO2002085923A2 | In VIVO incorporation of unnatural amino acids | 786 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate references, so treat this table as a signal of historical influence rather than of current competitive weight.
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 say about this field
Three patterns stand out once the assignee ranking, the filing trend and the citation table are read together: real but bounded concentration at the top, a filing pullback from a 2022 peak, and a citation table still dominated by antibody-engineering and checkpoint-inhibitor work filed years ago.
Leadership is real but not dominant
The leading assignee alone holds 2,816 records, yet the top 10 combined account for only 21.3% of all 63,854 records in scope. That leaves a substantial long tail of assignees each holding a modest share of filings.
Filing has cooled since its 2022 peak
Annual filings peaked at 1,172 in 2022 before falling to 665 by 2024, a 38% decline from the 1,080 filed in 2021. That decline should be read against a genuinely complete 2024 baseline, not against 2025 or 2026 figures still filling in.
Formulation and peptide chemistry carry the most claims
Medicinal preparations (A61K) and peptides & proteins (C07K) each cover roughly a fifth of all records, ahead of microorganism and genetic-engineering claims (C12N, 17.4%). Analytical method classes remain comparatively lightly claimed.
Older antibody-engineering patents still anchor the citation graph
The most-cited records in this corpus concern antibody glycosylation engineering and anti-PD-L1/CTLA-4 antibodies, filings that predate most of the dataset's filing window. Their citation counts reflect longevity in the field, not current filing intensity.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to protein & peptide therapeutics patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where activity has slowed
The ranked leaders span large-molecule pioneers and diversified pharma, but recent-year momentum data shows filing pace easing even among the most established names — consistent with the broader post-2022 pullback rather than any single company's retreat.
A single leader well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 2,816 records, more than double the fifth-place holder's 1,229. That gap narrows quickly further down the ranking, with tenth place at 754 records.
Long-standing inventor-assignee pairings persist
The strongest co-assignee relationship in the dataset links a single assignee with two named individual inventors across several hundred shared records, a pattern typical of early platform-era filings that have since gone quiet.
Even active filers show single-digit latest-year counts
Recent-year momentum among tracked assignees shows counts in the low single digits, with year-over-year declines of a third to over three-quarters for several major names. This reflects both a genuine slowdown and publication lag on the newest filings.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Novartis AG | 2 | -33% |
| Genentech, Inc. | 1 | -83% |
| Omeros Corporation | 1 | -75% |
| Human Genome Sciences, Inc. | 0 | — |
| RUBEN STEVEN M | 0 | — |
| ROSEN CRAIG A | 0 | — |
| Millennium Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Bristol-Myers Squibb Company | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific questions worth running down before committing to a filing strategy or a freedom-to-operate review in this space.
Map the white space in analytical classes
G01N, C12Q and C07H carry far fewer claims than A61K or C07K. Before assuming this space is open, check whether that reflects genuine white space or simply narrower claim drafting conventions in analytical patents.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack the post-2022 filing pullback by assignee
The 38% drop in filings from 2021 to 2024 is a field-wide figure. Breaking it out by individual assignee will show whether the pullback is broad-based or concentrated among a handful of the largest historical filers.
Run assignee trend analysis in EurekaStress-test the most-cited antibody families
The highest-cited records concern glycosylation engineering and checkpoint antibodies filed years before this dataset's later filings. Confirm their current legal status and geographic coverage before relying on them as freedom-to-operate landmarks.
Check patent status in EurekaCommon questions on this landscape
The dataset's leading assignee holds 2,816 records, well ahead of the rest of the field, but concentration overall is limited: the top 10 assignees combined account for only 21.3% of the 63,854 records in scope. That leaves a long tail of smaller filers, so leadership at the top does not translate into control of the whole field. Anyone assessing competitive risk should look at both the leader's portfolio and the breadth of the tail rather than assuming a handful of firms dominate.
Filing activity rose steadily to a peak of 1,172 in 2022, then declined to 665 by 2024, a complete-year drop of 38% from the 1,080 filed in 2021. That is a genuine pullback over the most recent period that can be reliably measured. Figures for 2025 and 2026 are not yet complete because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so they should not be read as evidence the decline is continuing or accelerating.
Medicinal preparations (A61K) and peptides & proteins (C07K) are the two most heavily claimed classes, each appearing on roughly a fifth of all 63,854 records. Microorganisms and genetic engineering (C12N) follows closely at 17.4%. Analytical and measurement classes such as G01N, C12Q and C07H appear on a much smaller share of records, suggesting the densest claim competition sits in composition and expression rather than in testing methods.
US20250281646A1, filed by Renbio, Inc. and published in September 2025, claims plasmid DNA constructs encoding a therapeutic protein for in vivo expression, along with methods of manufacturing and using them to treat disease. It represents a recent entrant into an approach — in vivo expression via plasmid constructs — that sits alongside more established recombinant protein manufacturing routes. Anyone developing plasmid-based expression constructs for therapeutic proteins should review this filing's specific claim scope directly rather than relying on the abstract alone.
A single patent record can be classified under several IPC subclasses at once, so class-level shares are calculated against the same total record count but are not mutually exclusive. For example, a filing claiming both a peptide composition and its therapeutic use could be tagged under both C07K and A61P. This is standard patent classification behaviour, not a data error, and it means class shares should never be summed together as if they were parts of a whole.
Research Protein & Peptide Therapeutics Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole protein & peptide therapeutics patent landscape 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.