Tissue Fixation Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 36.0% concentration at the top. The top 5 assignees combined hold 377 of the 1,046 records in scope (36.0%), with a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants behind them.
- Filings peaked in 2020, then eased. Annual filings hit 85 in 2020 and fell from 54 in 2021 to 24 in 2024, a 56% decline over that span — though 2025-26 counts are still filling in due to publication lag.
- G01N dominates, but the field is multi-disciplinary. 64.8% of records carry a G01N material-analysis class, yet C12Q nucleic-acid and C07K protein classes each appear in a meaningful minority, pointing to overlapping claim territory.
Filing growth compares 2021 (54 records) with 2024 (24) — 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 1,046 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
Tissue fixation and processing patents cover the chemistry and instrumentation used to stabilise, dehydrate and preserve biological specimens for downstream analysis — from formalin fixation protocols to microwave-assisted antigen retrieval and cold ischemia management. This landscape draws on 1,046 published records filed or published between 2015 and mid-2026, filtered on fixation and processing terms crossed with time-sensitive process parameters such as fixation time, cold ischemia time, dehydration schedule and nucleic acid quality.
The scope spans diagnostic pathology, molecular biology sample prep and organ/tissue banking, so claims range from wet-chemistry fixative formulations to automated processing hardware and downstream nucleic acid or protein preservation methods.
Filing trends and technology composition
Annual filing counts and IPC subclass distribution across the 1,046 records in scope, drawn directly from the underlying dataset.
Filing activity, 2017-2026
Filings rose from 38 in 2017 to a peak of 85 in 2020, then declined to 24 by 2024 (a 56% drop from the 2021 level of 54). 2025 and 2026 figures are undercounted because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months.
IPC subclass composition
G01N (material analysis and testing) appears in 64.8% of the 1,046 records, well ahead of C12Q (nucleic acid/enzyme testing, 21.1%) and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering, 16.3%). Because records can carry multiple IPC classes, these shares sum to more than 100%.
Shares are the percentage of the 1,046 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Tissue Fixation and Processing with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about tissue fixation and processing and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaMost-cited records and a representative filing
US11624684B2 — Method for tissue sample fixation
An aldehyde fixative solution contacts a tissue sample at a first, lower temperature for a first time period, then at a second, higher temperature for a second time period. The first stage typically runs 15 minutes to 4 hours at above 0°C to at least 15°C; the second stage runs 1 to 4 hours at above roughly 22°C up to 55°C. The staged-temperature approach is described as improving tissue morphology, IHC staining and preservation of downstream analytes relative to single-temperature fixation.Filed by Ventana Medical Systems, published 2023-04-11.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | US6207408B1 | High quality, continuous throughput, tissue fixation-dehydration-fat removal-impregnation method | 243 |
| 2 | US6291180B1 | Ultrasound-mediated high-speed biological reaction and tissue processing | 242 |
| 3 | US6217869B1 | Pretargeting methods and compounds | 227 |
| 4 | US5244787A | Antigen retrieval in formalin-fixed tissues using microwave energy | 210 |
| 5 | US6214055B1 | Method and kit for rapid preparation of autologous tissue medical devices | 202 |
| 6 | US6517843B1 | Reduction of porcine circovirus-2 viral load with inactivated PCV-2 | 178 |
| 7 | US20030219760A1 | Diagnostic and prognostic tests | 156 |
| 8 | US6072086A | Method and composition for controlling formaldehyde fixation by delayed quenching | 155 |
| 9 | US20140329704A1 | Markers for mature beta-cells and methods of using the same | 146 |
| 10 | US20130303826A1 | Prognostic signature for oral squamous cell carcinoma | 107 |
Citation counts favour older filings within the searched corpus and should be read as a signal of influence rather than current commercial importance.
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 numbers mean for a filing decision
Three patterns stand out once concentration, timing and class overlap are put side by side.
The top of the field is dense, not crowded overall
Five assignees hold 36.0% of the 1,046 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 46.7%. That leaves more than half the corpus spread across a long tail of single- or few-filing entrants, which is where freedom-to-operate analysis tends to find more room than the headline concentration suggests.
Activity has cooled from its 2020 peak
Filings climbed from 38 in 2017 to a peak of 85 in 2020, then fell to 24 by 2024 — a 56% decline from the 2021 level of 54. Because publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, the 2025-26 figures in the dataset are not yet a reliable read on current activity.
Fixation claims increasingly touch molecular biology
Beyond the 64.8% of records in G01N, 21.1% also carry a C12Q nucleic-acid testing class and 16.3% a C12N class. That overlap means a fixation process claim can collide with prior art written primarily for a downstream molecular assay, and vice versa.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to tissue fixation and processing, with the prior art for and against each one.
Who is filing, and where the claim space is still open
The ranked leaders sit alongside a long tail, and recent-year momentum among several of the largest historical filers has flattened to zero.
One assignee sits well ahead of the field
The leading assignee's 227 records dwarf the fifth-place count of 29 and the tenth-place count of 20, a gap that marks out a single dominant filer rather than a tight cluster at the top.
Historical leaders have gone quiet recently
Several of the largest historical filers, including diagnostics and life-science majors, show zero filings in the latest year and year-on-year declines of -100% for some. Given the publication lag, this understates true recent activity but still signals a slower pace than the 2020 peak.
Collaboration is limited and concentrated
Only 10 co-assignee pairs appear in the dataset, with the strongest pairings linking a diagnostics instrumentation firm to a pharmaceutical partner, and an academic pathology group to a university. Co-filing is the exception here, not the norm.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Ventana Medical Systems, Inc. | 0 | — |
| Ossium Health, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| QIAGEN GmbH | 0 | -100% |
| University of Miami | 0 | — |
| F. Hoffmann-La Roche AG | 0 | — |
| Agilent Technologies, Inc. | 0 | — |
| GOLDSBOROUGH ANDREW SIMON | 0 | — |
| Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd. | 0 | — |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to specific next steps depending on whether the goal is freedom-to-operate, portfolio strategy or white-space filing.
Check freedom-to-operate against the top 10
With 46.7% of the 1,046 records held by ten assignees, any new filing in staged-temperature fixation or antigen retrieval should be checked against that concentrated block before scoping claims elsewhere.
Run a freedom-to-operate searchWatch for a rebound once 2025-26 data fills in
The apparent decline to 24 filings in 2024 partly reflects publication lag; revisit the trend once later years mature to see whether activity has genuinely cooled or is simply underreported.
Track filing trends over timeExplore the under-claimed process branches
Cold ischemia management and dehydration schedule optimisation show thinner density than the core fixative chemistry claims, and may offer more room for a defensible first-filed position.
Explore white space in EurekaCommon questions about tissue fixation patents
One assignee leads the field with 227 records, well ahead of the fifth-place filer at 29 and the tenth-place filer at 20. That single-filer gap means the top of the ranking is dominated by one company rather than a tight cluster of several. Together the top 5 assignees hold 36.0% of the 1,046 records in scope, and the top 10 extend that to 46.7%, leaving more than half the field spread across a long tail of smaller filers.
Filings rose steadily from 38 in 2017 to a peak of 85 in 2020, then declined to 24 by 2024, a 56% drop from the 2021 level of 54. Because patent publication typically lags actual filing by around 18 months, the lower counts shown for 2025 and 2026 are not yet a reliable signal of current activity. Based on the data through 2024, the field has cooled from its 2020 high but has not disappeared.
The dominant IPC subclass is G01N (material analysis and testing), present in 64.8% of the 1,046 records, reflecting the diagnostic testing purpose of most fixation methods. A substantial minority also touch C12Q (nucleic acid and enzyme testing, 21.1%) and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering, 16.3%), showing that fixation chemistry claims regularly overlap with molecular biology and genetic testing claims. Smaller but notable shares appear in A61K medicinal preparations and C07K peptides and proteins.
Process-parameter branches such as cold ischemia time management, dehydration schedule optimisation and automated fixation temperature staging show thinner filing density than the core fixative chemistry claims that dominate the corpus. These areas sit adjacent to well-covered ground, such as staged-temperature aldehyde fixation, but have not attracted the same concentration of filings. A first claim in one of these branches would likely need to specify a concrete parameter range or automated control method to distinguish it from the broader fixation prior art.
US11624684B2, assigned to Ventana Medical Systems and published in 2023, claims a two-stage aldehyde fixation process: a lower-temperature contact stage (roughly 15 minutes to 4 hours at above 0°C to at least 15°C) followed by a higher-temperature stage (1 to 4 hours at above about 22°C up to 55°C). The patent's stated advantage is improved tissue morphology and IHC staining alongside better preservation of downstream analytes compared with single-temperature fixation. Anyone designing a staged-temperature fixation protocol within those parameter windows should review this claim set closely before finalising a process.
Research Tissue Fixation and Processing in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole tissue fixation and processing 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.