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 →Filing growth compares 2021 (9 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.
Site-specific conjugation chemistry addresses a manufacturing problem as much as a chemistry one: stochastic lysine or cysteine coupling produces antibody-drug conjugates with a spread of drug-to-antibody ratios, and that heterogeneity complicates manufacturability, batch release and regulatory comparability. The 19 records in this scope search for filings that explicitly claim homogeneity, conjugation efficiency or control of residual free payload alongside engineered-cysteine, enzymatic or other site-specific conjugation methods.
This is a narrow, term-anchored slice of the broader ADC patent space rather than a survey of all conjugation art. It is useful for scoping freedom-to-operate around manufacturability claims specifically, not for benchmarking overall ADC filing volume.
Two views of the same 19-record set: activity over time, and where those records sit across the IPC classification.
Filings opened at 3 in 2017, climbed to a peak of 9 in 2021, then fell to 0 by 2022 and have stayed low since. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the final one or two years understate real activity — but the drop from peak predates that lag window, so the cooling trend itself is not an artefact of reporting delay.
A61K (medicinal preparations) appears in 94.7% of the 19 records and C07K (peptides and proteins) in 89.5%, confirming that most claims are anchored on the therapeutic composition and the protein backbone rather than on the enzymatic machinery. C12N (genetic engineering, 36.8%) and C12P (fermentation and enzymatic synthesis, 5.3%) are comparatively thin, which is where enzymatic-conjugation-specific claims would sit.
Shares are the percentage of the 19 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about site-specific antibody conjugation chemistry and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaProvided herein are peptides having a photocrosslinking moiety useful for the synthesis of antibody-drug conjugates as well as methods of making and using such conjugates.Filed by Genentech, Inc.; published 2022-02-17 as US20220047711A1.


| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2020123275A1 | Photocrosslinking peptides for site specific conjugation to FC-containing proteins | 5 |
| 2 | US20170204445A1 | In vivo site-specific protein tagging using engineered sortase variants | 5 |
| 3 | US20220047711A1 | Photocrosslinking peptides for site specific conjugation to fc-containing proteins | 3 |
Citation counts inside this corpus favour older filings; treat them as a signal of influence on subsequent art, not of current commercial relevance.
Publication numbers are shown where the record carries one (3 of 3 rows); clicking a row searches Eureka by that number.
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 →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 →Three read-throughs from the trend, the classification split and the citation table.
Nine records published in 2021 against zero by the 2022 midpoint suggests the first wave of site-specific-conjugation manufacturability claims has largely been filed and published. New entrants should expect to build on, or design around, an established base rather than stake early ground.
With A61K and C07K each covering the large majority of records, most protection sits on the drug-conjugate composition and the protein scaffold. C12P at 5.3% signals that claims narrowly tied to the enzymatic synthesis step itself are still sparse.
The two most-cited records in this set both address alternatives to cysteine engineering — photocrosslinking peptides and engineered sortase variants — and each carries 5 citations within this corpus, the highest of the set. Later filers in either sub-route inherit this prior art directly.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to site-specific antibody conjugation chemistry, with the prior art for and against each one.
The ranked assignee list returns 7 companies for this search; it is the complete set the data endpoint returns for this scope, not a top-50 or top-100 cut.
The top-ranked assignee holds 9 records against a fifth-place count of 2, putting clear distance between the leader and the remaining six named assignees. That gap matters for freedom-to-operate scoping: a single portfolio review of the leader's claims will cover more ground than reviewing the rest of the ranking combined.
Beyond the leader, the ranking drops quickly to single- and low-digit filing counts. This is a specialist corner of ADC chemistry with few repeat filers rather than a saturated field with many similar claims stacked on top of each other.
Every ranked assignee shows zero records in the latest year captured, consistent with the broader trend collapse after 2021. Given the ~18-month publication lag, this understates true recent filing activity, but it also means no single company can be pointed to as currently accelerating in this data.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Janssen Biotech, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Genentech, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Pfizer Inc. | 0 | — |
| Byondis B.V. | 0 | — |
| Baili Bio (Chengdu) Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
| The Board of Trustees of the Leland Stanford Junior University | 0 | — |
The trend and classification data point to specific next steps depending on whether you are scoping freedom-to-operate or looking for open claim space.
With one assignee holding 9 of the ranked records, a focused claim-chart review of that single portfolio will tell you more about freedom-to-operate risk than a broad sweep of the remaining six assignees.
Explore assignee portfolios in Eureka →Fermentation and enzymatic-synthesis claims sit at just 5.3% of the 19 records — before filing in that space, check whether the low count reflects genuine white space or search-term boundary effects.
Run a deeper classification query in Eureka →Because publication trails filing by about 18 months, the apparent drop to zero after 2021 may partially reverse as more recent filings publish. Re-run this scope in six to twelve months to see if the trend holds.
Set up a monitoring alert in Eureka →In this landscape, site-specific conjugation refers to methods that attach a payload to a defined position on an antibody rather than to whichever lysine or cysteine residue happens to react, and the search was anchored specifically to filings that also claim homogeneity, conjugation efficiency, manufacturability or control of residual free payload. That combination excludes general ADC chemistry patents that do not address the manufacturability angle. Common technical routes covered include engineered cysteine conjugation, enzymatic conjugation such as sortase-based tagging, and photocrosslinking peptide approaches.
The assignee ranking for this scope returns seven companies, with the leading assignee holding 9 of the ranked records and the fifth-placed assignee holding 2. That is a meaningfully concentrated lead rather than an even spread, so a competitive review should start with the top assignee's full portfolio before working down the shorter tail. The ranking is the complete set returned for this search scope, not a filtered top-50 or top-100 list.
Yes, based on the trend data: filings rose from 3 in 2017 to a peak of 9 in 2021, then fell to 0 by the 2022 midpoint and have stayed low through the most recent years captured. Because patent publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the very last one or two years in any dataset understate true activity, so some of the apparent drop-off may still reverse as pending applications publish. Even accounting for that lag, the collapse from a 2021 peak to zero by 2022 is early enough that it likely reflects a real slowdown, not just a reporting artefact.
The IPC composition shows heavy concentration in A61K (94.7% of the 19 records) and C07K (89.5%), meaning most claims sit on the drug-conjugate composition and the antibody or peptide scaffold itself. C12P, covering fermentation and enzymatic synthesis, appears in only 5.3% of records, suggesting that claims narrowly tied to the enzymatic production step, as opposed to the resulting conjugate, are comparatively under-filed. Non-cysteine engineered handle chemistries and residual free-payload quantification methods are other areas with thin direct representation in this set.
US20220047711A1, assigned to Genentech, Inc. and published 2022-02-17, claims peptides bearing a photocrosslinking moiety used to synthesise antibody-drug conjugates, along with methods of making and using them. It sits alongside an earlier related filing, WO2020123275A1, on the same photocrosslinking approach, and both are among the most-cited records in this scope. Anyone developing a photocrosslinking-based site-specific conjugation method should review this family closely before finalising a chemistry route, since it defines the specific peptide-based crosslinking mechanism rather than antibody conjugation in general.
Go past this page: query the whole site-specific antibody conjugation chemistry 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.