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/synthetic-biology-patent-landscape-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-08-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Synthetic BiologySynthetic biology patents: who holds the core claims, and where the field is still open
- 28.8% concentration at the top. The five leading assignees combine for 3,488 of 12,123 records in scope — dense enough that new entrants should expect prior art on core gene-construct and engineered-microorganism claims.
- Filing has pulled back from its 2020 peak. Activity peaked at 1,319 records in 2020 and fell -45% from 2021 (1,202) to 2024 (656), the last year with complete data — publication lag means 2025-26 figures are still filling in.
- One subclass dominates the mix. C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) touches 67.7% of all 12,123 records, while adjacent measurement and testing classes like C12Q sit well under 10%.
12.1K
Published Records
29%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-45%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (1,202 records) with 2024 (656) — 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 12,123 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What the synthetic biology patent record actually shows
Synthetic biology patenting spans engineered microorganisms, gene and genetic constructs, metabolite production pathways, and the culture conditions that make them work at scale. Across 12,123 records published between 2015 and the 2026 cut-off, the field shows a pattern common to platform biology: a small group of research-heavy institutions holds a disproportionate share of the earliest and most-cited filings, while a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants works the margins. Patent families, not raw document counts, are the fairer unit here because they neutralise continuation filings and multi-jurisdiction duplication that can inflate a single invention's footprint.
The technology composition leans heavily on core genetic engineering claims (C12N) and medicinal preparations (A61K), with fermentation and enzymatic synthesis (C12P) and peptide/protein chemistry (C07K) forming a secondary tier. That distribution reflects where synthetic biology has moved fastest into commercial application — therapeutics and engineered production organisms — rather than where the underlying science is broadest.
Filing activity and technology mix, 2015-2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 Data
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 12,123-record dataset: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claims.
Filing trend: a 2020 peak, then a documented pullback
Filings rose from 803 in 2017 to a peak of 1,319 in 2020, then declined -45% from 1,202 in 2021 to 656 in 2024 — the last year that can be treated as complete. Years from 2025 onward are understated by construction: publication typically lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the apparent drop into 2026 (54 records) reflects incomplete data rather than a stalled field.
Technology composition: concentrated in core genetic engineering
C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) appears in 67.7% of all 12,123 records, more than double the next-largest subclass, A61K (medicinal preparations) at 30.2%. Measurement and testing classes — C12Q and G01N — sit in single-digit-to-low-double-digit territory, suggesting analytical and diagnostic tooling around synthetic biology is comparatively under-claimed relative to the engineering core.
Shares are the percentage of the 12,123 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 Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about synthetic biology patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
The most-cited records anchoring the field
Representative recent filing
Model-in-the-loop synthetic biology (US20260030416A1)
X DEVELOPMENT LLC
The filing describes an AI-based platform that generates an experiment definition for a synthetic biology experiment from a model of a biologic process, causes that experiment to run, evaluates the outcome, and updates the underlying model based on the result — a closed loop between computational modelling and wet-lab execution.Filed by X Development LLC, published 2026-01-29.
Highest-citation records in scope
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2013126726A1 | Double transgenic t cells comprising a car and a TCR and their methods of use | 924 |
| 2 | US20160208243A1 | Novel crispr enzymes and systems | 863 |
| 3 | US9790490B2 | CRISPR enzymes and systems | 757 |
| 4 | WO2014204726A1 | Delivery and use of the crispr-CAS systems, vectors and compositions for hepatic targeting and therapy | 601 |
| 5 | WO2013126712A1 | Compositions and methods for generating a persisting population of t cells useful for the treatment of cancer | 593 |
| 6 | US20190247050A1 | Integrated system for the infixion and retrieval of implants | 451 |
| 7 | WO2013022989A2 | Recombinant production of steviol glycosides | 402 |
| 8 | WO2015057699A2 | Pegylated drug-linkers for improved ligand-drug conjugate pharmacokinetics | 374 |
| 9 | WO2011153378A1 | Recombinant Production of Steviol Glycosides | 372 |
| 10 | WO2015089462A1 | Delivery, use and therapeutic applications of the crispr-CAS systems and compositions for genome editing | 352 |
Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had more time to accumulate citations within the searched corpus — read them as a signal of influence on downstream filings, not as a ranking of current technical 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 Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 or freedom-to-operate decision
Three findings from the dataset that change how a team should read the competitive picture before committing to a claim strategy.
Concentration
28.8%
of 12,123 records held by top 5 assignees
The top of the field is genuinely crowded
3,488 of 12,123 records in scope belong to just five assignees, and the top 10 combined reach 39.2% (4,757 records). Core CRISPR-adjacent and cell-therapy construct claims sit inside this concentrated group, so freedom-to-operate work on gene-editing or engineered T-cell constructs should start with these portfolios rather than the long tail.
Based on the assignee ranking of 100 companies.
Momentum
-45%
filing change, 2021 to 2024
Volume has pulled back from its 2020 high, but recently
Filings peaked at 1,319 in 2020, then fell from 1,202 (2021) to 656 (2024). Because publication lags filing by around 18 months, this decline should be read as a real, dataset-confirmed trend through 2024 — not extended into 2025-26, where the record count is still incomplete.
2024 is the most recent year treated as complete.
Technology mix
67.7%
of records carry a C12N classification
Genetic engineering claims dominate the classification mix
C12N appears in more than two-thirds of all 12,123 records, far ahead of A61K (30.2%) and C12P (24.8%). Measurement and analytical classes like C12Q (8.5%) and G01N (6.4%) are comparatively thin, which is where claim space looks least occupied relative to the core engineering layer.
Shares sum to more than 100% because records can carry multiple IPC 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 synthetic biology patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Players
Who is filing, and where activity is slowing
The leading assignees combine deep academic research portfolios with a smaller group of commercial biomanufacturing filers. Recent-year momentum has cooled across nearly all of the most active filers, which is consistent with the field-wide pullback from its 2020 peak rather than any single company's retreat.
Leader
1,040
records
A single institution holds the largest share
The leading assignee's 1,040 records make it the largest single filer in the ranking of 100 companies, well ahead of fifth place at 344 and tenth place at 171 — a steep drop-off that marks the boundary between the platform-scale filers and everyone else.
Ranking covers patent families, not raw document counts.
Co-filing
711
shared records, strongest pair
Academic co-assignee ties are dense at the top
The dataset records 10 co-assignee pairs, with the strongest combination reaching 711 shared records and the next two pairs at 480 and 389. This pattern points to sustained joint filing between a small cluster of research institutions rather than isolated collaborations.
Co-assignee pairs drawn from the full 12,123-record dataset.
Momentum
-78% to -89%
YoY change, leading filers
Recent-year activity has slowed across the leaders
Every one of the most active assignees shows a year-over-year decline in the latest year, ranging from -75% to -89%, with one commercial filer flat at 0%. Given the 18-month publication lag, this should be read as an artefact of incomplete recent-year data rather than firms exiting the field.
Latest-year counts are partial due to publication lag.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| The Broad Institute, Inc. | 5 | -78% |
| Massachusetts Institute of Technology | 3 | -86% |
| President and Fellows of Harvard College | 2 | -88% |
| The Regents of the University of California | 2 | -89% |
| Synlogic Operating Company, Inc. | 2 | 0% |
| Gilead Sciences, Inc. | 1 | -75% |
| Seagen Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| Amyris, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. 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 landscape points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or identifying open claim space.
Map claims against the concentrated top 10
With 39.2% of all 12,123 records held by ten assignees, a targeted claim-chart review of that group is more productive than a broad novelty search across the full dataset.
Run a freedom-to-operate check in EurekaWatch the under-claimed measurement and testing branches
C12Q and G01N sit well below the core C12N and A61K classes, suggesting diagnostic and analytical tooling around synthetic biology constructs has room for differentiated claims.
Explore white space in EurekaTrack co-filing clusters as a signal of direction
The strongest co-assignee pairs reach 711 shared records, and following where these institutions file jointly next can indicate where core platform claims are headed.
Monitor assignee activity in EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
FAQ
Common questions about synthetic biology patents
The leading assignee in this dataset holds 1,040 of 12,123 records in scope, well ahead of the fifth-ranked filer at 344 and the tenth at 171. The top five assignees combined account for 28.8% of all records, and the top ten reach 39.2%, which marks a meaningful concentration at the top of an otherwise long tail of smaller filers. Anyone assessing competitive position should look closely at this leading group before assuming open space, since core gene-construct and engineered-microorganism claims cluster there.
Filing volume peaked at 1,319 records in 2020 and then declined -45% from 1,202 in 2021 to 656 in 2024, the most recent year that can be treated as complete. Numbers for 2025 and 2026 appear lower still, but that reflects publication lag of roughly 18 months rather than an actual drop in filing activity. The safest reading is that the field cooled meaningfully after its 2020 high, with the most current trend still filling in.
C12N, covering microorganisms and genetic engineering, appears in 67.7% of all 12,123 records, making it the dominant classification by a wide margin. A61K (medicinal preparations, 30.2%) and C12P (fermentation and enzymatic synthesis, 24.8%) form a secondary tier. Because a single patent record can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100% and should be read as coverage rates rather than a breakdown of a whole.
The classification data shows measurement and testing subclasses — C12Q at 8.5% and G01N at 6.4% of records — sitting far below the core engineering classes, which points to comparatively thin claim coverage around diagnostic and analytical tooling for engineered biological systems. Culture-condition optimisation for cell-free systems and metabolite pathway monitoring also show less concentrated filing than the core gene-construct space. These are reasonable areas to probe for differentiated claims, though a formal novelty search against the specific claim language is still necessary before relying on this as a filing strategy.
Patent applications are typically published around 18 months after filing, so any year within that window will always show fewer records than it eventually will once processing catches up. In this dataset, 2026 shows only 54 records, but that number will rise as more applications from that period are published. The reliable trend line stops at 2024, where the -45% decline from 2021 is based on complete data rather than a still-filling recent year.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-08-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.Run this in Eureka MCP
Research Synthetic Biology Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole synthetic biology 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.