The GLP-1 story did not stop at one receptor, and US10981967B2 - "Long-acting conjugate of triple glucagon/GLP-1/GIP receptor agonist," issued April 20, 2021 to Hanmi Pharm. Co., Ltd. - shows where the science was heading two years before tirzepatide's dominance made dual-agonism a household idea.
There are two inventive limitations braided together in this claim. The first is receptor breadth: a single peptide that agonizes the glucagon, GLP-1, and GIP receptors - one molecule hitting three targets, a step beyond the dual GIP/GLP-1 mechanism. The second is the conjugation - a moiety that extends the peptide's half-life so it can be dosed long-acting.
Why does the conjugation carry weight equal to the pharmacology? Because in the metabolic-peptide market, dosing frequency is a commercial battleground. A triple-agonist that must be injected daily is a different product from one dosed weekly. The CPC tags make the dual nature explicit: C07K 14/605 (glucagon-family peptides) for the agonist, A61K 47/60 (polymer-conjugated actives) for the half-life extension.
The genus-versus-species framing is instructive. The genus is incretin-receptor agonism; the species this claim stakes is the specific triple-agonist-plus-conjugate construct. A challenger would probe whether the triple-receptor combination was obvious over known dual agonists, and whether the conjugation chemistry was conventional - which is why the specification's data on the specific construct's pharmacokinetics matters to validity.
For the landscape, this grant is a marker that the metabolic-peptide estate was already racing past single- and dual-agonism by 2021. The claim-construction question for any later triple-agonist program is whether its peptide-plus-conjugate construct reads on prior species like this one - a reminder that the GLP-1 IP wars were never only about Lilly and Novo Nordisk.