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/t-cell-engager-formats-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Patent Landscape · Antibody EngineeringT Cell Engager Formats: Patents Shaping CD3-Directed Bispecifics
- Concentrated but not closed. the leading assignee holds 703 records and the top 5 combine for 27.7% of all 8,408 records in scope — a strong core with room outside it.
- Filing has plateaued, not declined. 2021 to 2024 (the last complete year) moved from 973 to 979 filings, a flat +1%, after peaking at 993 in 2023.
- Claim pressure sits in two IPC classes. C07K peptide/protein claims cover 84.3% of records and A61K medicinal-preparation claims cover 68.1%, leaving thinner coverage in analytical and fermentation classes.
8,408
Published Records
28%
Top-5 Share of All Records
+1%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction
Filing growth compares 2021 (973 records) with 2024 (979) — 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 8,408 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Overview
What this landscape covers
T cell engager formats redirect cytotoxic T cells against tumour antigens by pairing a CD3-binding arm with a target-binding domain, in tandem single-chain, dual-affinity, or multi-domain architectures. The claim activity tracked here spans cytokine release mitigation, affinity tuning, target density dependence, serum half-life extension, and the on-target toxicity / potency window trade-offs that define whether a given format is dosable in the clinic. These are not incidental features — they are the claim elements that determine whether a molecule can be developed without infringing an earlier filing.
The dataset spans 8,408 published records filed between 2015 and the 2026-07-31 cut-off, drawn from applications that combine T cell engager or CD3-binding-arm language with the specific toxicity- and pharmacokinetics-management terms above. Publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so the most recent one to two years in any trend understate true filing activity.
Filing activity and technology composition, 2015–2026
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on T Cell Engager Formats 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 Data
Filing trends and technology composition
Two views of the same 8,408 records: how filing volume has moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses carry the claim density.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings rose from 496 in 2017 to a peak of 993 in 2023, then held roughly flat through 2024 (973 to 979, +1%) before the 2025–2026 figures — still incomplete under the publication lag — taper toward 119. Read the plateau, not the tail, as the current signal.
IPC subclass composition
C07K (peptides & proteins) appears on 84.3% of records and A61K (medicinal preparations) on 68.1%, reflecting that most filings claim both the engager molecule and its formulation. C12N genetic-engineering claims sit at 18.2%, while G01N analytical methods (4.2%), C07D heterocyclics (2.2%), and C12P/C12Q enzymatic and diagnostic classes (near 1% each) are comparatively open.
Shares are the percentage of the 8,408 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 T Cell Engager Formats covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.
Go deeper on T Cell Engager Formats with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about t cell engager formats and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaKey Patents
Most-cited records in this landscape
Representative Filing
Method of reducing bispecific T cell engager or CAR-T mediated cytokine release syndrome using interleukins-4, -10, or a fusion protein thereof
DEKA BIOSCIENCES, INC.
The disclosure provides for various methods including a method of reducing the severity of bispecific T cell engager (BiTE) or chimeric antigen receptor T cell (CAR-T) induced cytokine release syndrome (CRS) comprising administering to a patient in need thereof an amount of a composition comprising an interleukin 10 (IL-10) or an IL-10 agent, an interleukin 4 (IL-4) or an IL-4 agent, or combinations thereof.Filed by DEKA Biosciences, published 2023-10-26 as US20230340052A1.
Highest-citation records
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2008119567A2 | Cross-species-specific CD3-epsilon binding domain | 1,253 |
| 2 | US8735553B1 | Anti-PD1 antibodies and their use as therapeutics and diagnostics | 1,127 |
| 3 | WO2015142675A2 | Treatment of cancer using chimeric antigen receptor | 830 |
| 4 | WO2015035606A1 | Anti-PD1 antibodies and their use as therapeutics and diagnostics | 695 |
| 5 | WO2013026833A1 | Bispecific t cell activating antigen binding molecules | 639 |
| 6 | US20150079109A1 | Anti-PD1 Antibodies and their Use as Therapeutics and Diagnostics | 486 |
| 7 | US20080260738A1 | Single chain FC, methods of making and methods of treatment | 419 |
| 8 | WO2013163427A1 | Antibodies to treat HIV-1 infection | 329 |
| 9 | WO2013026837A1 | Bispecific t cell activating antigen binding molecules | 329 |
| 10 | US20100150918A1 | Cross-species-specific binding domain | 328 |
Citation counts favour older filings that have had more time to accumulate citations within this corpus — treat them as a signal of influence on the field, not of current commercial relevance.
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 T Cell Engager Formats 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 →Insights
What the numbers say about the field
Three findings that shape where a new filing or a freedom-to-operate search should start.
Concentration
27.7% of 8,408
top 5 assignees' share
The core is dense, the tail is long
The leading assignee alone holds 703 records, and the top 5 combined account for 27.7% of all 8,408 records in scope. That leaves the majority of filings spread across a long tail of single-digit and single-filing entrants, which is where narrower, defensible claim positions still exist.
Ranking covers 100 assignees, counted in records.
Filing momentum
+1% (2021→2024)
three-year filing growth
A plateau after the 2023 peak
Filings peaked at 993 in 2023 and the 2021-to-2024 span shows essentially flat growth at +1%. Given the 18-month publication lag, the visible drop into 2025 and 2026 reflects incomplete data, not a genuine slowdown in filing activity.
2024 is the last year treatable as complete.
Claim geography
84.3% vs 4.2%
C07K share vs G01N share
Molecule claims dominate, method and assay claims trail
C07K peptide and protein claims sit on 84.3% of records and A61K formulation claims on 68.1%, while G01N analytical-method claims sit at only 4.2%. Assay-based and companion-diagnostic claim strategies are comparatively under-filed relative to the molecule-format claims they would need to support.
Shares sum above 100% because records carry multiple IPC classes.
Collaboration signal
159 co-filed records
strongest assignee pair
Academic-industry pairing is concentrated
Co-assignee activity is limited to 10 identified pairs, and the strongest single pairing accounts for 159 shared records between an academic institution and a major filer. This points to a small number of durable research partnerships rather than broad cross-industry co-filing.
10 co-assignee pairs identified in total.
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 t cell engager formats, with the prior art for and against each one.
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on T Cell Engager Formats 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
Players
Who is filing, and where activity is shifting
Recent-year momentum diverges sharply from cumulative rank: some leaders are pulling back on filing while others are accelerating from a smaller base.
Cumulative leader
703 records
leader's total
Scale without recent acceleration
The top-ranked assignee's cumulative total of 703 records is well ahead of the field, but its most recent-year momentum shows a pullback rather than continued acceleration — a pattern seen across several of the largest cumulative filers.
Recent-year figures are subject to the publication lag.
Fast mover
+167% YoY
fastest-growing assignee
A smaller filer accelerating from a low base
One major pharmaceutical assignee shows +167% year-over-year growth in the latest year, moving from a low prior-year count to 8 records — a sharp acceleration worth tracking even though the absolute volume remains modest next to the cumulative leaders.
Momentum figures reflect single-digit absolute counts; treat percentage changes with that in mind.
Pulling back
-75% YoY
steepest recent decline
Several top-10 filers are slowing
Multiple assignees in the ranked leaders show year-over-year declines of -29% to -75% in the latest year, including large cumulative filers. Given the publication lag, some of this softening will resolve upward as later filings publish, but the direction across several major filers simultaneously is notable.
Based on recent-year momentum by assignee in the ranking.
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Janssen Biotech, Inc. | 20 | -29% |
| Amgen Inc. | 9 | -53% |
| Amunix Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 9 | -36% |
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG | 8 | +167% |
| Amgen Research (Munich) GmbH | 8 | +14% |
| Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. | 3 | -75% |
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd | 3 | -75% |
| Novartis AG | 1 | -75% |
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on T Cell Engager Formats 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
What's Next
Where to take this
The landscape points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy, or identifying a filing gap.
Map claim overlap against the top assignees
With 27.7% of records held by five assignees, a targeted claim-chart comparison against those five is the fastest way to surface direct overlap before drafting new claims.
Run a claim comparison in Patsnap EurekaTrack momentum shifts, not just cumulative rank
Recent-year swings as large as +167% and -75% among ranked leaders suggest strategy changes worth monitoring quarterly rather than relying on cumulative totals alone.
Set up assignee monitoring in Patsnap EurekaTest the under-claimed branches for a filing position
Analytical-method and enzymatic-synthesis classes sit well below the molecule and formulation classes in filing density, which is where a narrower claim may still be available.
Explore white space in Patsnap EurekaSource: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on T Cell Engager Formats 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 T cell engager format patents
The dataset's ranked leader holds 703 of the 8,408 records in scope, with the top 5 assignees combined accounting for 27.7% of all records. That concentration sits alongside a long tail of smaller filers, so cumulative leadership does not mean the field is closed — plenty of assignees hold single-digit filing counts in specific sub-areas. Anyone assessing competitive position should look at both the cumulative ranking and the recent-year momentum, since the two often diverge.
Filing volume rose steadily to a peak of 993 in 2023, and the 2021-to-2024 span (the last year treatable as complete) shows essentially flat growth at +1%. The apparent decline in 2025 and 2026 figures is an artefact of the roughly 18-month lag between filing and publication, not a genuine drop in activity. Treat any trend line's final one to two years as provisional rather than a signal of slowing interest.
Relative to the dominant C07K (84.3% of records) and A61K (68.1%) classes covering the engager molecules and their formulations, classes tied to analytical methods (G01N, 4.2%), enzymatic synthesis (C12P, 1.1%), and diagnostic measurement (C12Q, 0.9%) carry far fewer filings. That gap suggests assay-based and manufacturing-process claims around T cell engagers are comparatively under-claimed relative to the core molecule architectures they support.
US20230340052A1, filed by DEKA Biosciences and published 2023-10-26, claims methods of reducing cytokine release syndrome caused by bispecific T cell engagers or CAR-T therapy through administration of IL-10, IL-4, or a fusion protein of either. It is a method-of-treatment claim tied to a specific mechanism of CRS mitigation, not a claim over the engager molecule itself. Anyone developing a T cell engager with its own CRS-management approach should check whether their mitigation strategy falls within this interleukin-based method rather than assuming freedom-to-operate on the CRS front generally.
Only 10 co-assignee pairs are identified across the dataset, and the strongest pairing accounts for 159 shared records between an academic institution and a major pharmaceutical filer. That concentration signals a small number of durable, exclusive-feeling research partnerships rather than an open field of cross-industry collaboration. For a company evaluating partnership or licensing options, it is worth checking whether the academic counterpart in a strong pairing has independent filing activity outside that relationship.
Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on T Cell Engager Formats 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 T Cell Engager Formats in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole t cell engager formats 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.