Starch Modification Patents: Top Companies & Filing Trends 2026
- 23.4% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees together hold 3,780 of the 16,139 records in scope, a meaningful concentration for a chemistry this broad.
- Filings down 35% since the last full-data peak. Filings fell from 760 in 2021 to 491 in 2024, the last year publication lag lets us treat as complete.
- Medicinal use, not food, is the largest single class. A61K medicinal preparations cover 32.2% of records, ahead of food applications at 22.4%.
Filing growth compares 2021 (760 records) with 2024 (491) — 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 16,139 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this dataset covers
This landscape draws on 16,139 published records matching starch modification chemistry: cross-linking reagents, octenyl succinate derivatization, degree-of-substitution claims, paste viscosity and freeze-thaw stability performance, and clean-label constraint language. The scope spans filings from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 data cut-off, with publication lag meaning the most recent one to two years understate real filing activity.
The technology sits at an intersection of food science, pharmaceutical excipients, cosmetics, paper chemistry and detergents, which is why a single record often carries several IPC classes at once. That spread is itself a finding: starch modification is not a niche food-processing topic but a shared input across at least four distinct industries, each with its own claim conventions and prior art density.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 16,139-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and how those records split across the IPC subclasses they touch.
Filing trend, 2017-2026
Filings ran from 786 in 2017 to a peak of 908 in 2020, then eased to 760 in 2021 and 491 in 2024 – a 35% decline over that three-year span. 2025 and 2026 figures (38 in 2026) are still filling in under normal publication lag and should not be read as a continued drop.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61K medicinal preparations lead at 32.2% of records, followed by A23L food and beverage applications at 22.4%. Polymer compositions (C08L, 13.8%) and polysaccharide derivatives (C08B, 13.5%) sit close together, with cosmetics (A61Q, 11.0%), paper (D21H, 9.3%), detergents (C11D, 8.0%) and therapeutic activity (A61P, 6.4%) rounding out the picture. Because records carry multiple classes, these shares sum to more than 100% of the record total.
Shares are the percentage of the 16,139 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Starch Modification Technologies with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about starch modification technologies and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaRepresentative filing and most-cited prior art
Carrageenan and starch texturizer based natural deodorant (US20240423893A1, Cargill)
The filing claims a natural-based deodorant composition combining a texturizer of 5.0-15.0 wt% based on total composition weight, a kappa-carrageenan gelling agent at 0.5-2.5 wt%, and 5.0-35.0 wt% emollient in water. The texturizer itself is defined as a blend of n-octenyl succinate anhydride (nOSA) modified starch and hydroxypropylated starch, held to a weight ratio of roughly 3:1 to 20:1.Filed by Cargill, published 2024-12-26.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2005002359A2 | Modified starch, uses, methods for production thereof | 653 |
| 2 | WO2003033540A2 | starch | 623 |
| 3 | US6200949B1 | Process for forming solid phase controllably releasable fragrance-containing consumable articles | 593 |
| 4 | US5095054A | Polymer compositions containing destructurized starch | 556 |
| 5 | US5059282A | Soft tissue paper | 512 |
| 6 | US4977252A | Modified starch emulsifier characterized by shelf stability | 447 |
| 7 | US5935826A | Glucoamylase converted starch derivatives and their use as emulsifying and encapsulating agents | 432 |
| 8 | US20080069779A1 | Foamable vehicle and vitamin and flavonoid pharmaceutical compositions thereof | 395 |
| 9 | US6869923B1 | Perfume compositions | 389 |
| 10 | WO2011072117A1 | Fabric and home care products | 383 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within this corpus; treat them as a signal of influence rather than current 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 filing strategy
Reading the concentration, trend and classification figures together points to where claim space is occupied and where it is not.
The top of the field is genuinely concentrated
Five assignees together account for 23.4% of all 16,139 records in scope, and the top ten reach 31.5%. For a chemistry this broad, that level of concentration means a handful of players have built durable claim positions across multiple use classes rather than one narrow niche.
Volume has eased from its 2020 peak
Filings peaked at 908 in 2020, then declined from 760 in 2021 to 491 in 2024, a 35% fall over the last three-year window that can be treated as complete. That is a real cooling rather than a data artefact, though 2025-2026 figures will revise upward as publication catches up.
Medicinal use outweighs food use
A61K medicinal preparations cover 32.2% of the 16,139 records, ahead of A23L food and beverage applications at 22.4%. Anyone assuming starch modification patents are primarily a food-industry story is working from an incomplete map of the claim space.
Foundational prior art is decades-old in places
The most-cited records in this corpus include base starch modification and destructurized-polymer filings going back to the early 1990s alongside PCT applications from the 2000s. High citation counts here mark foundational technique disclosures, not current commercial relevance.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to starch modification technologies, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who holds the leading positions, and where the gaps sit
The ranked leaders span food ingredients, pharma, tobacco, flavour and fragrance, and specialty chemicals companies, reflecting how many industries depend on the same underlying starch chemistry.
One filer sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee holds 2,054 records, more than double the fifth-place total of 313. That gap suggests a company with a long-standing, actively maintained portfolio rather than a single burst of filing activity.
A tight cluster forms behind the leader
From fifth place (313 records) to tenth place (239 records) the gap narrows considerably, pointing to a group of similarly sized specialty and ingredient companies competing for the same claim territory rather than one clear runner-up.
Momentum has slowed even for the leader
The leading assignee filed 11 records in the latest tracked year, down 75% year on year, and several other ranked assignees show similarly sharp pullbacks or filings at zero. Read this alongside publication lag rather than as a sign the leader has stopped investing.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated
Only ten co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, and the strongest of these reaches 23 joint records. Co-filing is not a major pattern in this field; most portfolios appear to be built through in-house or wholly-owned subsidiary filing rather than joint ventures.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Procter & Gamble Co | 11 | -75% |
| Nicoventures Trading Ltd | 1 | -97% |
| International Flavors & Fragrances Inc | 1 | -75% |
| Novamont SpA | 1 | — |
| National Starch & Chemical Investment Holding Corp | 0 | — |
| DSM IP Assets BV | 0 | -100% |
| McNeil PPC Inc | 0 | — |
| Givaudan SA | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The figures above establish the shape of the field. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific claims and specific competitors.
Check freedom-to-operate against the leader's portfolio
With one assignee holding 2,054 records against a fifth-place figure of 313, any new filing in this space should be checked against that leader's claim scope first, particularly in the medicinal and cosmetic classes where it is most active.
Explore the leader's portfolio in EurekaMap the under-claimed branches before drafting
Freeze-thaw stability, clean-label constraint language and detergent-grade cross-linking show lighter claim density than the core food and medicinal classes, which is where a first claim is more likely to clear prior art.
Run a white-space search in EurekaModel the citation network around the most-cited prior art
The most-cited records anchor much of the field's foundational technique disclosures; understanding what they actually claim, rather than just how often they are cited, clarifies what later filings had to design around.
Trace citations in EurekaCommon questions about starch modification patents
The assignee ranking in this dataset is led by a single company with 2,054 records, well ahead of the fifth-place holder at 313 and tenth place at 239. Together the top five assignees hold 23.4% of all 16,139 records in scope, and the top ten hold 31.5%. The leaders span food ingredient companies, pharmaceutical and consumer products firms, and specialty chemical manufacturers, reflecting how many industries rely on modified starch chemistry rather than a single dominant sector.
Filing activity peaked at 908 records in 2020 and has declined since, falling from 760 in 2021 to 491 in 2024, a 35% drop over that span. 2024 is the most recent year that can be treated as reasonably complete; 2025 and 2026 figures will rise as publication catches up with roughly an 18-month lag. Based on the complete years available, the honest read is a real cooling from the 2020 peak rather than a slowdown in the most recent partial years.
The dataset's search scope centres on cross-linking reagents, octenyl succinate derivatization, degree-of-substitution control, paste viscosity and freeze-thaw stability performance, and clean-label constraint formulations. By application, medicinal preparations (A61K) account for 32.2% of records, ahead of food and beverage uses (A23L) at 22.4%, with polymer compositions, polysaccharide derivatives, cosmetics, paper, detergents and therapeutic uses each carrying a meaningful share. Because a single filing often claims across several of these application areas, the routes overlap rather than sit in separate silos.
Relative to the dense core classes of medicinal preparations and food applications, branches such as freeze-thaw stability performance claims, clean-label constraint formulations, detergent-grade cross-linked starch and paper-strength derivatives show comparatively lighter claim density. That does not mean these areas are unclaimed, but the concentration of filing activity sits elsewhere, which is where a new entrant is more likely to find room to build an independent claim position. Any white-space read should be checked against the specific claim language of nearby records before drafting.
It is moderately concentrated at the top and long-tailed beneath it. The leading assignee alone holds 2,054 of the 16,139 records in scope, and the top five combined reach 23.4% of all records, but the ranking runs to 100 companies with a marked narrowing between fifth place (313 records) and tenth place (239 records). Co-filing is rare, with only ten co-assignee pairs identified and the strongest reaching 23 joint records, suggesting most portfolios are built independently rather than through joint ventures.
Research Starch Modification Technologies in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole starch modification technologies 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.