Vaccines & Immunotherapies Patents: Who Leads, Where the Gaps Are 2026
- 25% sits with a handful of filers. The top 5 assignees combined hold 6,413 records, 25.0% of all 25,655 records in scope — the rest is a long tail of single- and few-filing entrants.
- Filing volume has come off its 2020 peak. 1,487 records published in 2020; the complete-year comparison shows 2021's 1,480 falling to 567 by 2024, a 62% drop over that span.
- Medicinal-preparation claims dominate the class mix. A61K appears on 65.5% of records and C07K (peptides & proteins) on 41.6% — most filings stack general formulation claims on top of a protein or peptide composition.
Filing growth compares 2021 (1,480 records) with 2024 (567) — 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 25,655 records in scope (CR5), not by the ranked leaders only.
What this landscape covers
This dataset covers 25,655 published patent families filed or published against therapeutic vaccines and immunotherapy claims paired with dosage composition, binding assay, therapeutic response, delivery carrier, binding affinity or cell response language — the combination that separates a formulation or diagnostic-binding claim from a bare biological description. The scope runs from 2015 through the 2026-08-31 data cut-off, so the most recent one to two years understate true filing activity because publication trails filing by roughly 18 months.
Most-cited records in this corpus cluster around PD-1/PD-L1 checkpoint binding and costimulatory polypeptide claims — a signal of which foundational filings later applicants had to cite around, not of which technology is newest. Receiving-office data shows the United States as the largest single office in scope, with Europe, the WIPO PCT route, Australia and Canada following at meaningfully smaller volumes.
Let an AI agent run this analysis on your own technology
Pick a task. Every answer cites the patents behind it.
Filing trend and technology composition
Two views of the same 25,655-record corpus: filing volume by year, and the IPC subclasses that carry the claim density. Because a single record can carry several IPC codes, the class shares below sum to more than 100% of the record total — that is expected and is the same denominator the chart uses.
Filing trend, 2017–2026
Filings rose to a peak of 1,487 records in 2020, then eased; the last complete-year comparison available is 2021's 1,480 falling to 567 in 2024, a 62% decline. 2025 and 2026 figures (2026 at 50 so far) are still filling in under the publication lag and should not be read as a continued fall.
Technology composition by IPC subclass
A61K (medicinal preparations) leads at 65.5% of records, followed by C07K (peptides & proteins) at 41.6% and A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) at 33.1%. C12N (microorganisms & genetic engineering) sits at 27.5%, with G01N (material analysis & testing), C12Q (enzyme/DNA measurement), C07D (heterocyclics) and C07H (sugars & nucleic acids) each below 12%.
Shares are the percentage of the 25,655 records in scope. A patent can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
Go deeper on Vaccines & Immunotherapies Patent Landscape with Eureka
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about vaccines & immunotherapies patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe records other filers had to design around
Formulation of peptide immunotherapies (US20240229143A1, Iogenetics)
This invention provides a method for maximizing the immune response to mutated tumor specific proteins, either by means of stimulation of dendritic cells or T cells in vitro followed by administration of these cells to a patient, or by means of administration of a neoantigen vaccine in which de novo peptides, or their encoding nucleic acids, have been designed to ensure an appropriate level of binding affinity to a particular cancer patient's MHC alleles. This invention further provides for modulating the immune response in an immunopathology.Filed by Iogenetics; published 2024-07-11 — a patient-specific neoantigen approach that sits downstream of the checkpoint-blockade claims dominating the most-cited list.
| # | Publication no. | Patent title | Citations |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | WO2011066342A2 | Simultaneous inhibition of PD-l1/PD-l2 | 2,677 |
| 2 | WO2009114335A2 | PD-1 binding proteins | 2,276 |
| 3 | WO2010027827A2 | Targeted costimulatory polypeptides and methods of use to treat cancer | 2,253 |
| 4 | WO2011066389A1 | Targeted binding agents against b7-h1 | 1,789 |
| 5 | US8168757B2 | PD-1 binding proteins | 1,767 |
| 6 | US8609089B2 | Compositions of PD-1 antagonists and methods of use | 1,162 |
| 7 | WO2015112800A1 | Human antibodies to PD-1 | 968 |
| 8 | US8779108B2 | Targeted binding agents against B7-H1 | 924 |
| 9 | WO2002099084A2 | Composite binding polypeptides | 897 |
| 10 | US20130034559A1 | Targeted Binding Agents Against B7-H1 | 882 |
Citation counts favour older filings simply because they have had longer to accumulate citations inside this corpus — treat the ranking as a map of influence within the dataset, not a ranking of current technical 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 filing strategy
Three patterns stand out once families, not raw counts, are used as the unit of comparison.
The leader board is short, the tail is long
The top 5 combined hold 6,413 records — a quarter of everything in scope — while the tenth-ranked assignee has 287. Most of the ranked field files in the single digits to low hundreds, which means most of this space is still open to a well-drafted entrant rather than locked up by a handful of incumbents.
Volume has cooled from its 2020 high
1,487 records published in the peak year of 2020; by the last complete comparison year, 2024, annual volume had fallen to 567 from 1,480 in 2021. Treat 2025 and 2026 numbers as provisional — publication lag of roughly 18 months means recent years always understate true filing activity.
Formulation claims sit on top of protein composition claims
A61K (medicinal preparations) and C07K (peptides & proteins) are the two most common classes by a wide margin, at 65.5% and 41.6% of records respectively. A new filing in this space is more likely to be competing against a formulation-plus-composition claim pair than against a single narrow class.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to vaccines & immunotherapies patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
Assignee landscape and recent momentum
The ranked field runs 100 companies deep, from a leader at 4,200 records down through a tenth-place holder at 287. Recent-year figures for several named assignees show sharp year-over-year drops, but those drops sit inside the same publication-lag window described above and should be read as incomplete rather than as a real retreat.
A single filer well ahead of the field
The top-ranked assignee holds 4,200 records against a fifth-place figure of 498 — a gap wide enough that the leader's portfolio likely spans multiple sub-programmes rather than one product line.
Academic-hospital pairs file jointly
The strongest of the 10 identified co-assignee pairs links a cancer research institute with a general hospital system at 176 shared records, followed by pairs with a broad-institute partner and a university partner — a pattern consistent with clinical-trial-linked filing rather than pure corporate R&D.
Latest-year counts are not a reliable trend signal
Every named assignee in the recent-momentum data shows a steep year-over-year decline in the latest year, several down to zero. Given the roughly 18-month publication lag, this is most consistent with incomplete data for the newest filings rather than an actual pullback in R&D.
| Assignee | Recent year | YoY |
|---|---|---|
| Gilead Sciences, Inc. | 6 | -63% |
| ModernaTX, Inc. | 4 | -60% |
| OSE Immunotherapeutics | 1 | -75% |
| Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH | 0 | -100% |
| Dana-Farber Cancer Institute, Inc. | 0 | -100% |
| The Trustees of the University of Pennsylvania | 0 | -100% |
| GlaxoSmithKline Biologicals SA | 0 | -100% |
| Millstone Bio (Mestone Biotech) | 0 | -100% |
Where to take this analysis
The dataset points to a field with a short concentrated leader group, a long open tail, and claim density stacked heavily on formulation and protein-composition language.
Check freedom-to-operate against the most-cited records
The checkpoint-blockade filings at the top of the citation table define much of the prior art that later claims in this space have had to work around. Any new filing touching PD-1/PD-L1 binding should be checked against these first.
Run a freedom-to-operate check →Map the white space before drafting claims
Under-claimed branches like patient-specific MHC-binding assays and non-viral peptide-vaccine delivery sit adjacent to dense claim territory without being covered by it. A first claim there has more room to be broad.
Explore white space in Eureka →Common questions on this landscape
The ranked field for this dataset covers 100 assignees, with the leader holding 4,200 records and the top 5 combined holding 6,413 records, 25.0% of all 25,655 records in scope. Beyond the top 10 — which together hold 31.6% of records — the field thins quickly into a long tail of companies and institutions filing in the single digits to low hundreds. That combination of a short leader group and a wide open tail means a well-drafted new entrant is not automatically boxed out by incumbents.
Filing volume peaked in 2020 at 1,487 records and the last fully comparable years show a genuine decline, from 1,480 records in 2021 to 567 in 2024 — a 62% drop. However, publication lags filing by roughly 18 months, so 2025 and 2026 figures are necessarily incomplete and should not be read as continuing that decline. The honest read is that the field cooled from its 2020 high through 2024; anything after that is still filling in.
A61K (medicinal preparations) is the most common class, appearing on 65.5% of the 25,655 records in scope, followed by C07K (peptides & proteins) at 41.6% and A61P (therapeutic activity of compounds) at 33.1%. C12N (microorganisms & genetic engineering) covers 27.5% of records, with G01N, C12Q, C07D and C07H each appearing on well under 12%. Because records often carry several IPC codes, these percentages sum to more than 100% and should not be treated as mutually exclusive shares of the field.
US20240229143A1, filed by Iogenetics and published 2024-07-11, covers methods for maximising immune response to mutated tumour-specific proteins through dendritic cell or T-cell stimulation in vitro, or through administration of a neoantigen vaccine built from peptides or nucleic acids designed for binding affinity to a specific patient's MHC alleles. It sits downstream of the checkpoint-binding filings that dominate the most-cited list in this corpus, so it is more likely to constrain patient-specific neoantigen design work than general checkpoint-blockade approaches. Anyone working on MHC-affinity-tuned peptide design for cancer immunotherapy should read its claims in full rather than relying on the abstract.
The dense claim territory sits on A61K formulation language stacked with C07K protein/peptide composition claims and PD-1/PD-L1 binding — that is where most citation weight and filing volume concentrate. Adjacent branches such as patient-specific MHC-binding assays, non-viral delivery carriers for peptide vaccines, and combination checkpoint-plus-cell-response biomarker claims show comparatively thin density by comparison. A first claim in one of those branches has more room to be drafted broadly before running into prior art.
Research Vaccines & Immunotherapies Patent Landscape in depth with Eureka
Go past this page: query the whole vaccines & immunotherapies 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.