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/proton-and-heavy-ion-therapy-systems-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Medical Equipment · Patent LandscapeProton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems: Patents, Leading Filers and Open Claim Space
- Filing has cooled since its 2017 peak of 5 records, with the 2022 midpoint down to 2 — a flat-to-declining trend rather than a growing field.
- One filer group leads with 8 records, far ahead of the rest of the ranked field, where fifth and tenth place both sit at 2.
- H05H accelerator claims appear in a third of records, while healthcare informatics (G16H) and data recognition (G06K) barely register — an early signal of where software-side claims are thin.
21
Published Records
US
Leading Jurisdiction
10
Active Filers Ranked
2017
Peak Filing Year
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview
What this landscape covers
This review covers 21 published records filed between 2015 and 2026 that combine proton or heavy ion therapy system claims with specific technical routes: pencil beam scanning, gantry size and cost tradeoffs, range uncertainty, synchrotron-versus-cyclotron beam generation, and adaptive planning. The scope is narrow by design — it isolates records where the claim language ties a therapy system to one of these named engineering problems, rather than sweeping in all radiation-oncology filings.
Electrotherapy and radiation-therapy claims under A61N dominate the set, appearing in all but one record, while particle-accelerator claims under H05H sit underneath a third of them. That split matters for freedom-to-operate work: most of the claim density sits on the delivery and treatment-planning side, not on the accelerator hardware itself.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems 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
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
10,000 free credits to start
The Numbers
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 21-record set: how filing activity has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the most recent year understates true filing activity and should be read with that lag in mind.
A 2017 peak that has not been repeated
Filings peaked at 5 records in 2017 and had fallen to 2 by the 2022 midpoint, with 0 recorded in the most recent year. Read the tail-end drop as a publication-lag artefact first, and a genuine slowdown second — but the multi-year decline from the 2017 peak is a real signal, not a lag artefact.
Claim density sits on delivery, not accelerator hardware
A61N (electrotherapy & radiation therapy) appears in 95.2% of the 21 records, H05H (plasma & particle accelerators) in 33.3%, G16H (healthcare informatics) in 14.3%, and G06K (data recognition & presentation) in 4.8%. Because a single record can carry more than one class, these shares add up to more than 100% and each is measured against the same 21-record denominator.
Shares are the percentage of the 21 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 Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about proton and heavy ion therapy systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited records in this set
Representative Filing
Method for measuring field size factor for radiation treatment planning using proton pencil beam scanning
MAYO FOUNDATION FOR MEDICAL EDUCATION AND RESEARCH
Systems and methods for radiation treatment planning in proton therapy using pencil beam scanning ("PBS") are described. The disclosure covers quantifying the output from a proton therapy system implementing PBS, for use when commissioning a new proton therapy system or performing quality assurance on one. A spot delivery pattern that includes a spiral-out pattern is used for beam delivery, with control points along the pattern defining a beam pause time during delivery of the proton beam.Filed by Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research, published 2018-09-13 as US20180256919A1.
Highest-cited records, 2015-2026
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US20160144201A1 | Intensity-modulated proton therapy | 53 |
| 2 | US20140350322A1 | Intensity-modulated proton therapy | 50 |
| 3 | US10661100B2 | Method for measuring field size factor for radiation treatment planning using proton pencil beam scanning | 39 |
| 4 | US9220920B2 | Intensity-modulated proton therapy | 33 |
| 5 | US20180256919A1 | Method for measuring field size factor for radiation treatment planning using proton pencil beam scanning | 23 |
| 6 | US20180178038A1 | Compact lightweight high-performance proton therapy beamline | 7 |
| 7 | US10485995B2 | Compact lightweight high-performance proton therapy beamline | 7 |
| 8 | US9555265B2 | Intensity-modulated ion therapy | 7 |
| 9 | WO2023217532A1 | Compact beam transport system for multi-room particle therapy facility | 5 |
| 10 | CN110140429A | 紧凑型轻量级高性能质子治疗束线路 | 3 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus — treat them as a signal of influence on later filings, not of current commercial importance.
Patent titles are shown in the language they were filed in, not translated, so that each record stays verifiable against the original filing — a translated title will not match in Eureka or in any national register. 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 Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems 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 →Analysis
What the data means for filing strategy
Four read-outs from the 21-record set, each tied to a figure already in scope.
Filing Momentum
5 → 0
2017 peak to latest year
The field has not sustained its 2017 peak
Filing activity peaked at 5 records in 2017 and dropped to 2 by the 2022 midpoint. Even allowing for the roughly 18-month publication lag on the most recent year, the multi-year trajectory points to a field where the core claim space filled up early rather than one still expanding.
Filing trend, 2015-2026
Claim Concentration
95.2%
of records carry A61N claims
Delivery and treatment claims dominate
Almost every record in scope touches A61N electrotherapy and radiation-therapy claim language, while only a third also carry H05H accelerator claims. New entrants competing on beam-generation hardware face a comparatively less crowded claim space than those competing on delivery and planning.
IPC composition, 21 records
Citation Pattern
53 citations
top-cited record
Intensity-modulated proton therapy anchors the field
The most-cited records in this set cluster around intensity-modulated proton therapy and pencil-beam field-size measurement, both filed well before the 2017 peak. Their citation counts reflect years of accumulated influence inside this corpus rather than current filing activity.
Most-cited records table
Co-filing Pattern
5 pairs
co-assignee relationships
Co-assignment is limited and mostly intra-group
Only five co-assignee pairs appear across the set, and the strongest is between two entities within the same corporate family. Cross-organisation co-filing between independent inventors and separate corporate assignees is present but thin, suggesting most development in this set happened inside single organisations rather than through joint ventures.
Co-assignee pairs, 21 records
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 proton and heavy ion therapy systems, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems 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
Competitive Landscape
Who holds the claims, and where the gaps sit
The ranking below covers the 10 companies the data endpoint returns for this search — it is the complete ranked field for this scope, not a top-50 or top-100 cut.
Leader
8 records
leading assignee
One group holds a clear lead
The leading assignee group holds 8 of the records in this ranking, well ahead of the rest of the field, where fifth and tenth place are tied at 2 records each. That gap, combined with the strongest co-assignee pair sitting inside this same corporate family, points to one organisation having built out its filing position early and consistently.
Assignee ranking, 10 companies
Long Tail
2 records
fifth and tenth place, tied
A flat tail below the leader
From fifth place down to tenth place, filers are bunched at 2 records apiece, with no clear second-tier leader emerging. That flatness suggests the rest of the field is filing defensively or exploring specific technical niches rather than building broad portfolios.
Assignee ranking, 10 companies
Momentum
0 in latest year
across every ranked assignee
No ranked assignee is actively filing in the latest year
Every one of the six assignees with recent-year momentum data shows 0 filings in the latest year, including a documented -100% year-over-year drop for one European filer. Given the publication lag, this understates true activity, but it is consistent with the broader flat-to-declining trend since 2017.
Recent-year momentum by assignee
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Varian Medical Systems, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Varian Medical Systems Particle Therapy LLC | 0 | — |
| Elekta AB | 0 | — |
| Siemens Healthineers International AG | 0 | -100% |
| Loma Linda University Medical Center | 0 | — |
| Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research | 0 | — |
| Paul Scherrer Institute | 0 | — |
| SCHULTE REINHARD W | 0 | — |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems 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
Next Steps
Where to take this analysis
This landscape narrows a broad radiation-oncology field down to systems tied to specific technical routes. Three directions extend the analysis.
Run a freedom-to-operate check on a specific claim
The gantry size, range uncertainty and synchrotron-versus-cyclotron branches carry fewer claims than the core delivery space — worth checking against a specific product design before committing to an architecture.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaTrack the leading filer's portfolio in detail
One assignee group holds 8 of the ranked records and the strongest co-assignee pair in the set. A full portfolio pull would show which specific claims are active, expired, or in prosecution.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaWatch for the next filing wave
Filing has been flat to declining since the 2017 peak, but the most recent year is understated by publication lag. A rerun of this search in twelve months would show whether activity is genuinely dormant or about to resurface.
Explore in Patsnap EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems 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 this landscape
In this 21-record landscape, one assignee group leads with 8 records, well ahead of the rest of the ranked field. The strongest co-assignee relationship in the whole dataset also sits inside this same corporate family, which suggests a single organisation has built a consistent filing position over the period covered. Below the leader, the field is flat, with fifth and tenth place both holding 2 records each, so there is no obvious second-tier leader to watch instead.
Not on this evidence. Filing peaked at 5 records in 2017 and had dropped to 2 by the 2022 midpoint, with the most recent year showing 0. Publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, so the very latest year is always going to look emptier than it eventually will, but the multi-year decline from the 2017 peak predates that lag effect and points to a genuine slowdown in new filing rather than an artefact of reporting delay.
Synchrotron-versus-cyclotron selection is one of the specific technical routes this landscape was built to isolate, alongside pencil beam scanning and range uncertainty. The claims here sit mostly under H05H, the plasma and particle accelerator subclass, which appears in a third of the 21 records — a much smaller share than the 95.2% carrying A61N electrotherapy and radiation-therapy claims. That gap means accelerator-generation architecture is comparatively less crowded with prior art than the delivery and treatment-planning side of these systems.
US20180256919A1, filed by Mayo Foundation for Medical Education and Research and published 2018-09-13, covers a method for measuring field size factor in proton therapy using pencil beam scanning, intended for commissioning new systems or running quality assurance on existing ones. Its distinguishing technical feature is a spot delivery pattern that includes a spiral-out pattern, with control points along that pattern defining a beam pause time during proton beam delivery. Anyone building a PBS commissioning or QA workflow that uses a similar spiral delivery pattern with timed control points should read this filing's claims closely before finalising their own method.
The clearest gaps by claim density sit in range uncertainty mitigation, synchrotron-versus-cyclotron selection criteria, adaptive planning software integration, and gantry size and cost reduction architectures — all named technical routes in this search that carry far fewer claims than the core A61N delivery space. Healthcare informatics claims under G16H appear in only 14.3% of the 21 records and data recognition under G06K in just 4.8%, making the software and informatics layer around these systems the thinnest-claimed part of the whole landscape.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems 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 Proton and Heavy Ion Therapy Systems in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole proton and heavy ion therapy systems 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.