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 →Dataset of 558 qPCR reference-gene normalization families: filer concentration, IPC splits and filing trend through 2026.
1,357 published records collapse into 558 simple (DOCDB) families; the difference is the same invention filed in more than one country. THE FIRST AFFILIATED HOSPITAL OF ZHENGZHOU UNIV is named on 13 of the 558 patent families in scope. One patent family can name several filers, so these figures are not slices of a divided whole and do not add up. In force = 363 of 1,357 records still granted and maintained at the data cut-off; the rest are pending, withdrawn, refused or lapsed.
This dataset gathers records matching real-time or quantitative PCR together with reference gene, housekeeping gene or normalization language, combined with expression or quantification terms. No date limit was applied, so the 558 simple patent families and 1,357 published records in scope reflect whatever matches the search string across the full span the database holds, not a chosen window of years.
Readers should treat the filing-trend chart separately from this total: it shows a recent window only, and the two most recent years on it are still filling in as later-filed applications publish.
Ordered by volume only, not by importance or claim strength. Counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families, so one invention filed in several countries counts once. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field as recorded on each document; subsidiaries and group companies are not merged. The icon before each name is read from the name itself (words such as University, Institute or Ltd); the data carries no organisation-type field, so treat it as a reading aid rather than a classification. Filings held by named individuals rather than organisations are removed where they can be identified (8 here); that identification is not exhaustive, so an individually held filing can still appear below. Either way those filings stay inside the totals above. This table shows the top 30 of the 92 filers returned for this search; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 92 is not the complete set of filers. A single family can name more than one filer, so these counts overlap and do not add up to the total.
The figures below are drawn directly from the search result set: a filing trend counted in published records by earliest filing year, and an IPC breakdown counted in simple patent families.
Published records ran from 28 in 2007 to a peak of 105 in 2018, with 20 recorded for 2026. The stretch from 2022 onward is still filling in as applications publish, so recent counts should not be read as a decline.
Counted in published records by earliest filing year, not de-duplicated into families. A filing is counted in the year it was filed, but it only becomes visible after it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. 2022 onwards are therefore still filling in and are shaded; no growth figure on this page uses them. Because this series counts documents rather than inventions, a rise can mean more inventions or the same inventions filed in more countries; this dataset cannot separate the two. This chart covers 2007-2026 (1,311 records); the 1,357 total quoted above includes earlier filings outside the window.
C12Q (measuring and testing involving enzymes or DNA) appears on 87.8% of the 558 families, and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) on 46.2%. Because one family can carry several IPC classes, these shares add up to more than 100%, and the chart carries 33 subclasses in total, of which only the two largest are discussed here.
Shares are the percentage of the 558 patent families in scope. One patent family can carry several IPC classes, so the shares add up to more than 100%.
This page is one run against one query. Ask Eureka your own question about quantitative pcr reference gene normalization algorithm patent landscape and every answer comes back with the patent numbers behind it.
Try EurekaThe abstract describes a fluorescence dye with a high Stokes shift large enough to skip at least one intermediate emission filter channel. It is used as a reference dye for non-droplet based dPCR systems to evaluate compartment filling levels, as a reference dye for fluorescence PCR normalization, or as a target-detection dye in multiplex PCR, with the compound bound to a probe or primer as a fluorescent label across dPCR, qPCR, RT-PCR and related formats.This is the first record returned under the database's default ordering, not a ranking by citations, grant status or breadth. Its number, assignee and filing date are shown alongside this summary.


Selected as the first record the search returns under the database default order, then shown in full. It is not ranked by citations, claim breadth or commercial importance, and it is not a judgement about which filing in this space matters most.
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 →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 →Three figures worth sitting with before drawing any conclusion about this field.
363 of the 1,357 published records (27%) were granted and still in force as of the 2026-10-27 retrieval date. The remainder are pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or not determinable, and that breakdown is not available on this page. This is a snapshot of legal status at one point in time, not a measure of filing quality.
The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou Univ is named on 13 of the 558 simple patent families, a 2.3% share. 47 of the 92 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each. Filer rows overlap because one family can name several filers, so rows cannot be summed into a combined share.
C12Q (measuring and testing involving enzymes or DNA) appears on 490 of the 558 families (87.8%), and C12N (microorganisms and genetic engineering) on 258 (46.2%). Because a family can carry multiple IPC classes, these two shares overlap rather than add cleanly to a combined total.
Published records counted by earliest filing year ran from 28 in 2007 to a peak of 105 in 2018, with 20 recorded for 2026. The chart counts documents, not inventions, and the years from 2022 onward are still filling in as later filings publish.
Eureka can read the same corpus for gaps instead of for coverage: under-claimed branches adjacent to quantitative pcr reference gene normalization algorithm patent landscape, with the prior art for and against each one.
This page reports what one search returned. Turning that into a filing or freedom-to-operate decision needs tools built for claim-level reading.
A family count or an abstract summary cannot tell you what a granted claim requires. Pull the full claim set for any record before drawing conclusions about scope.
Explore Patsnap EurekaThe 92 listed filers are ordered by volume only and are not rolled up to corporate group. Ongoing monitoring catches new filings and status changes as they publish.
Explore Patsnap EurekaThis search returned 1,357 published records, which de-duplicate to 558 simple patent families once the same invention filed in multiple countries is counted once. No date limit was applied to the search string, so this reflects the full span the database holds for this query, not a chosen window of years. The two counts answer different questions: records tell you how many documents published, families tell you how many distinct inventions sit behind them.
The First Affiliated Hospital of Zhengzhou Univ is named on 13 of the 558 simple patent families, a 2.3% share, the largest single-row figure in this dataset. 47 of the 92 listed filers hold 2 or fewer families each, which points to a field with one larger filer and many smaller ones rather than a small group holding most of the volume. Filer rows cannot be added together because one family can name several filers, so any combined total would over-count the underlying set.
IPC subclass C12Q, covering measuring and testing methods involving enzymes or DNA, appears on 490 of the 558 families (87.8%), and C12N, covering microorganisms and genetic engineering, appears on 258 (46.2%). A single family can carry multiple IPC classes, so these shares are not mutually exclusive and add up to more than 100% together. The full breakdown spans 33 subclasses in total, with these two carrying the largest shares among them.
Published records by earliest filing year ran from 28 in 2007 up to a peak of 105 in 2018, with 20 recorded for 2026. Filing data published after 2022 is still arriving: a filing made in 2024 may not appear in a search run today if it has not yet published, so the most recent years understate their eventual totals. No growth rate is presented here because the recent-year data is too incomplete to support one.
363 of the 1,357 published records (27%) were granted and in force at the retrieval date of 2026-10-27. The remaining 73% cover pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed and not-determinable statuses, but that breakdown is not separated out in this dataset. In-force status is a snapshot at one point in time rather than a measure of how commercially active or enforceable any given right is.
Go past this page: query the whole quantitative pcr reference gene normalization algorithm patent landscape corpus yourself, in your own scope.
Every answer comes back with patent numbers you can open.
Search. Every figure on this page comes from one Patsnap search, run once and not edited afterwards. This is the exact search string:
TAC:(("real time PCR" OR "quantitative PCR" OR qPCR) AND ("reference gene" OR "housekeeping gene" OR normalization) AND (expression OR quantification))
Reading the field codes: TAC searches the title, abstract and claims of each record, not the full description. The search string sets no date limit, so the scope is every matching record in the database regardless of when it was filed. It is not restricted to recent years. How this string was built matters for how far the counts can be pushed. It was generated in batch from a topic list rather than hand-crafted for this page, and the result set is not manually screened. A keyword search over title, abstract and claims both over-captures (unrelated filings that happen to use the same words) and under-captures (the same invention written in different words). This page cannot measure either effect, so read every figure here as what this particular string returned, not as what exists in the field. One subclass (C12Q) carries 87.8% of the patent families, so this search returned a classification-tight set.
What is being counted. Two different units appear on this page and they are not interchangeable. The filer list and the technology split are counted in simple (DOCDB) patent families: one invention counts once however many countries it was filed in. The total, the jurisdiction split and the filing-year chart are counted in published records: the same invention counts once per publication. For this search that is 1,357 records and 558 families. Record counts reward filing in many jurisdictions; family counts do not. Shares are only ever taken against a denominator in the same unit, and each one names it.
Who the filers are. Names come from Patsnap's standardised assignee field, as recorded on the documents themselves. They are not rolled up to corporate group: a parent and its subsidiaries appear as separate entries, and a portfolio acquired from another company stays under the name on the document unless the assignment is reflected there. This list is meant to carry organisations, not people. Filings held by a named individual are identified by matching the assignee against the inventors on the same search, and, for names written in Chinese, Japanese or Korean characters, by the name carrying no organisational suffix; those are removed from the list (8 of them here). Neither test is exhaustive: the inventor list it matches against is itself capped, and a personal name written in Latin script with no organisational wording in it cannot be told apart from a short company name by rule. So an individually held filing can still appear in the list. Those filings stay inside every total and share on this page either way, so the listed entries can add up to less than the total. A record shown in full further down still names its assignee exactly as the patent office records it, including where that is a person: that name is how the record is identified and checked. What is left out of the ranking is people as ranked entries, not people as cited sources. The table shows the top 30 of the 92 filers returned, ordered by count alone; the data endpoint returns at most 100 entities, so even that 92 is not every filer. One patent family can name several filers and each is counted separately, so these rows are not slices of a divided whole: adding them together over-counts, and this page deliberately publishes no combined "top five" share for that reason. See every filer, individuals included
Dates. The year chart counts by earliest filing year, not publication year. A filing only becomes visible once it publishes: roughly 18 months for most routes, and up to 30 months where a PCT application enters national phase. Measured across these pages, the year four back from today still holds only about 89% of its eventual count. 2022 onwards are therefore shaded on the chart as still filling in. The data behind this page was retrieved on 2026-10-27.
Legal status. "In force" counts documents whose legal status at retrieval was granted and maintained (363 of 1,357). Everything else is pending, withdrawn, refused, lapsed or not determinable, and those states are not broken out here because the underlying codes do not separate them cleanly. Legal status changes continuously and is reported per document, not per family. Get the status breakdown in Eureka
Classification. The technology split uses IPC subclasses (four characters, for example H01M). A single record usually carries several, so the shares add up to more than 100% and a record can appear in more than one bar. Subclass is a coarse grouping; it describes the field a record was classified into, not what the claims cover. Break the classes down to subgroup level
Who wrote the words. The tables, charts, counts, shares and patent numbers on this page are produced directly from the search result by a program; none of them are written or estimated by a language model. The surrounding prose, headings, FAQ answers and the answers in the question panel are drafted by a language model that is given those same figures and is not permitted to introduce others. Prose can still mis-describe a correct figure, so where the two disagree, the tables and charts are the record.
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 limitations that apply to every figure above. Recent filings are under-counted, because an application is not public until roughly 18 months after filing and database loading adds further delay. The search string defines and constrains everything shown: records that use different terminology, or that sit outside the fields searched, are absent and cannot be counted. Applicant names, classification codes, legal-status codes and citation records are taken as recorded and may contain errors, duplicates, omissions or stale entries. Ordering by volume is not a measure of quality, scope, enforceability or commercial value, and a larger portfolio is not a stronger one. 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, validity or infringement search, nor does it constitute legal, financial, investment, or professional advice, and it should not be relied upon as such. No attorney-client relationship is created by it. Any patent, commercial, or strategic decision should be verified independently against the primary records 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.
The question panel. The answers behind the suggested questions on this page were written when the page was generated, not in response to your click. The progress steps that play before an answer appears are an animation of how that analysis was done; nothing is being searched or computed at that moment. Typing your own question instead opens Patsnap Eureka, which does run it live.
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
Something wrong, out of date, or missing on this page? Tell us and it goes straight to the team that maintains it.
This page