Book a demo

Toothpaste Abrasive & Fluoride Patents: Who Leads, Gaps 2026

Toothpaste Abrasive & Fluoride Patents: Who Leads, Gaps 2026
https://www.patsnap.com/resources/blog/rd-blog/toothpaste-abrasive-and-fluoride-systems-patent-landscape/ · Patsnap · data cut-off 2026-07-31 · downloaded from the live page
Oral Care Patent Landscape
Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride System Patents: Concentration at the Top
  • 82.8% of the field sits with five filers. 125 of 151 records in scope belong to the top five assignees, with one leader alone holding 58 — a filing pattern with almost no open middle tier.
  • Filing has cooled from its 2022 peak. Output peaked at 10 records in 2022; the tracked span from 2021 to 2024 shows a 50% decline, though 2025-2026 figures are still filling in due to publication lag.
  • A61K and A61Q dominate; inorganic chemistry classes trail far behind. 86.8% of records touch medicinal-preparation claims and 76.8% touch cosmetic-use claims, while non-metallic compound chemistry (C01B) appears in only 20.5%.
Get a prior-art report on your approach
151
Published Records
83%
Top-5 Share of All Records
-50%
Filing Growth 2021→2024
US
Leading Jurisdiction

Filing growth compares 2021 (2 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. Top-5 share is the combined record count of the five largest assignees divided by all 151 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.

Published byPatsnap Research··7 min readSourced from Patsnap Eureka
Field Overview

What this landscape covers

Toothpaste abrasive and fluoride system patents cover the chemistry that keeps a dentifrice both cleaning and therapeutically stable: precipitated silica abrasives engineered to avoid quenching soluble fluoride, stannous formulations that resist oxidation and discoloration over shelf life, and the rheology and flavour-compatibility work needed to make those systems manufacturable at scale. The search underlying this page combines toothpaste abrasive and fluoride dentifrice terms with the specific stability and performance problems — radioactive dentin abrasion testing, silica particle design, fluoride availability, stannous stability, paste rheology and flavour compatibility — that separate a patentable formulation from a routine one.

The 151 records in scope run from 2015 through the 2026-07-31 cut-off, spanning six major receiving offices. The picture that emerges is one of a mature, narrowly held field: a small number of assignees built the foundational abrasive-fluoride compatibility chemistry decades ago, and recent filing activity is comparatively thin.

Filing activity and technology composition, 2015-2026
  1. 1COLGATE PALMOLIVE CO58
  2. 2J M HUBER CORP44
  3. 3PROCTER & GAMBLE CO13
  4. 4RICHARDSON VICKS INC5
  5. 5NOVAFLUX INC5
  6. 6PROTEGERA INC5
  7. 7COLONIAL CHEM INC4
  8. 8EVONIK OPERATIONS GMBH4
  9. 9BLOCK DRUG CO INC3
  10. 10JIN SAN JIANG (ZHAOQING) SILICON MATERIAL CO LTD2
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee ranking and totals. Derived from a Patsnap search on Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems 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 Numbers

Filing trends and technology composition

Two views of the same 151 records: how filing volume moved year over year, and which IPC subclasses the claims actually sit in.

A field past its filing peak

Annual output rose to a peak of 10 records in 2022, then fell; the 2021-to-2024 window shows a 50% decline. Because publication typically lags filing by around 18 months, the 2025 and 2026 figures are not yet complete and should not be read as continued decline.

A field past its filing peak03581002017201820192020202110202220232024202502026Most recent year is partial — publication lag means later filings are not yet visible.

Concentrated in two adjacent classes

A61K (medicinal preparations) and A61Q (cosmetic use) together anchor the field at 86.8% and 76.8% of records respectively, since most dentifrice claims are dual-purpose therapeutic and cosmetic formulations. Inorganic chemistry classes — C01B, C09K, C09C — describe the abrasive particle and mineral-additive side and appear in a smaller, more specialised slice of records.

Concentrated in two adjacent classesA61K · Medicinal preparations13186.8%A61Q · Cosmetics use11676.8%C01B · Non-metallic elements & inorga…3120.5%C09K · Materials for misc. applicatio…127.9%A01N · Biocides / agrochemicals96.0%C09C · Inorganic pigments & treatment53.3%C08K · Use of additives in polymers32.0%D01D · Man-made filament spinning32.0%Other96.0%

Shares are the percentage of the 151 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 Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems covering 2015–2026, data cut-off 2026-07-31. Counts reflect published records only and shift as new filings publish.

Go deeper on Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems with Eureka

This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about toothpaste abrasive and fluoride systems and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.

Try Eureka
Foundational Filings

The patents everyone in this space cites

Representative Filing
US4421527A1983-12-20

US4421527A — High fluoride compatibility dentifrice abrasives and compositions

J. M. HUBER CORPORATION

Novel precipitated silicon dioxide abrasive compositions which can be incorporated into therapeutic toothpaste compositions containing both soluble fluoride salts and soluble phosphate salts are disclosed. The abrasives comprise low structure precipitated silicon dioxides which have been reacted with about 10 to 300 parts per million alkaline earth metal ion, particularly calcium. Reaction with the alkaline earth metal ion minimizes abrasive interaction with the fluoride ion source in therapeutic toothpaste. Also provided are methods for preparation of the novel silicon dioxide abrasives and resulting toothpaste formulations containing such abrasives.Filed by J. M. Huber Corporation, granted 1983-12-20 — part of a three-patent family that anchors fluoride-compatible silica abrasive claims industry-wide.

View full filing
Most-cited records in scope
#Publication no.Patent titleCitations
1US4340583AHigh fluoride compatibility dentifrice abrasives and compositions1,207
2US4420312AMethod for production of high fluoride compatibility dentifrice abrasives and compositions243
3US4421527AHigh fluoride compatibility dentifrice abrasives and compositions230
4US20070025928A1Stannous oral care compositions215
5WO2008041055A1Stannous oral care compositions133
6US20090186090A1Oral Care Composition to Reduce or Eliminate Dental Sensitivity101
7US4357318ADentifrices with improved soluble fluoride availability98
8US6419174B1Abrasive compositions and methods for making same75
9US6403059B1Methods of making dentifrice compositions and products thereof66
10US5589159ADispersible particulate system for desensitizing teeth63

Citation counts favour older records simply because they have had longer to accumulate them; treat this as a map of influence, not of current filing activity.

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 Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems 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
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 →
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 →
Reading the Data

What the filing pattern tells a filer

The concentration and class data point to a field where the foundational chemistry is locked up and recent activity is thin — useful context before committing search or drafting budget.

Concentration
82.8%
of 151 records held by top 5

The field has almost no open middle tier

With 125 of 151 records held by five assignees and one leader alone holding 58, freedom-to-operate work in core abrasive-fluoride compatibility claims should assume dense prior art from a small set of holders, not a fragmented landscape.

Based on assignee ranking, 28 companies
Momentum
-50%
2021 to 2024 filing change

Filing has slowed from its 2022 peak

Output peaked at 10 records in 2022 and the 2021-2024 window shows a 50% decline. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this should be read as a real slowdown through 2024 rather than evidence about 2025-2026, which are still incomplete.

Peak year: 2022, 10 records
Composition
20.5%
of records in C01B inorganic chemistry

Particle chemistry is the smaller, more specialised slice

While A61K and A61Q claims dominate as the therapeutic and cosmetic-use framing common to nearly all dentifrice filings, the inorganic compound chemistry that actually defines abrasive particle behaviour (C01B) sits in only 20.5% of records — a narrower, more technical layer beneath the broad formulation claims.

C01B: 31 of 151 records
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 toothpaste abrasive and fluoride systems, with the prior art for and against each one.

Find the white space →
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Co-assignee relationships and derived observations. Derived from a Patsnap search on Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems 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
Who's Filing

A field led by legacy formulators

The ranked assignee list is dominated by long-established oral care and specialty chemical companies; recent-year momentum has gone quiet across the board.

Leader
58 records
of 151 in scope

One assignee holds more than a third of the field

The top-ranked assignee's 58 records, against a total of 151 in scope, sets the scale for what a new entrant is filing against in core abrasive and fluoride-compatibility claims.

Assignee ranking, 28 companies
Tail
5 records
fifth-place assignee

A steep drop after the leader

Fifth place holds 5 records and tenth place holds 2 — the ranking falls off quickly after the top few names, leaving a long tail of single- and low-digit filers rather than a deep competitive middle.

Top 10 combined: 143 of 151 records, 94.7%
Activity
0
latest-year filings, several tracked assignees

Momentum has gone quiet across leading names

Recent-year momentum tracking shows several of the historically largest filers, including the field leader, recording zero filings in the latest year — consistent with the broader 2021-2024 slowdown rather than any single company's retreat.

Momentum by assignee, latest year
🔍
Under-claimed adjacent branches
Sub-areas that sit outside the dense core claim space, based on the low-share IPC classes in this dataset
Stannous stability additivesSilica particle surface treatmentPaste rheology modifiersFlavour-compatibility masking agentsMan-made filament carriers (D01D)
Rank all filers by momentum →
Recent-year filing momentum by assignee
AssigneeRecent yearYoY
Colgate-Palmolive Co.0
J. M. Huber Corporation0
Procter & Gamble Co.0
NOVAFLUX INC0
Richardson-Vicks Inc.0
COLONIAL CHEM INC0
Block Drug Co., Inc.0
SCHNEIDERMAN EVA0
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Assignee-level momentum. Derived from a Patsnap search on Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems 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
Next Steps

Where to take this analysis

The numbers above describe the field as it stands at the 2026-07-31 cut-off. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision means going deeper on specific claims and specific holders.

Map claims against the leader's portfolio

With one assignee holding 58 of 151 records, any new formulation work in this space should start by identifying exactly which claims in that portfolio overlap with the intended composition.

Explore assignee portfolios in Eureka

Test draft claims against the under-claimed branches

Stannous stability and silica particle surface treatment show lower filing density than the core abrasive-fluoride claims — a reasonable starting point for claim language that avoids the densest prior art.

Run a claim novelty check in Eureka
Source: Patsnap Eureka. Forward-looking reading of the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems 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
Questions

Frequently asked questions

Answers are grounded in the same dataset. Derived from a Patsnap search on Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems 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 Toothpaste Abrasive and Fluoride Systems in depth with Eureka

Go past this page: query the whole toothpaste abrasive and fluoride systems corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.

Try Eureka

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.

Help us improve this page

Found incorrect or outdated information? Let us know and we'll get it fixed.