Item 1A. Risk Factors

You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, as well as the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in our other public filings, including in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in our financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and in our other public filings, which could materially affect our business, financial condition or future results. The risks described below are not the only risks that we face. The occurrence of any of the following risks, or of additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We may disclose changes to risk factors or additional risk factors from time to time in our future filings with the SEC.

Risks Related to Our Limited Operating History, Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have a limited operating history, have not completed any clinical trials and have no products approved for commercial sale, which may make it difficult for you to evaluate our current business and predict our future success and viability.

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. We were incorporated in February 2019 and our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, licensing key intellectual property rights, conducting research and development of our product candidates ourselves and with collaborators, collaborating on scale-up of product candidate manufacturing, establishing cold chain delivery logistics and preparing for and conducting our ongoing and planned preclinical studies and clinical trials.

AlloNK, our lead product candidate, is in early clinical development and our other product candidates and programs are in preclinical development or discovery stages. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully complete a clinical program, including large-scale, pivotal clinical trials, obtaining marketing approval, manufacturing product at a commercial scale, or arranging for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conducting sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. This may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business to date and assess our future viability.

We expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

Investment in biopharmaceutical product development is highly speculative because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and the significant risk that product candidates will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval or become commercially viable. For the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, our net losses were $65.4 million and $28.7 million, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $246.7 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and additional operating losses for the foreseeable future as we seek to advance our product candidates through preclinical and clinical development, expand our research and development activities, develop new product candidates, complete clinical trials, seek regulatory approval and, if we receive regulatory approval, commercialize our products. Furthermore, the costs of advancing product candidates into each succeeding clinical phase tend to increase substantially over time. The total costs to advance any of our product candidates to marketing approval in even a single jurisdiction would be substantial. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with cell therapy product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to generate any revenue from the commercialization of any approved products or achieve or maintain profitability. Our expenses will also increase substantially as we operate as a public company and add clinical, scientific, operational, financial and management information systems and personnel, including personnel to support our product development and planned future commercialization efforts.

Before we generate any revenue from product sales, each of our product candidates will require additional preclinical and/or clinical development, potential regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, manufacturing, building of a commercial organization, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, the European Medicines Agency (EMA), the competent authorities of individual European Union (EU) Member States or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to perform preclinical studies and clinical trials in addition to those that we currently anticipate, and/or to modify any of our manufacturing processes or make other changes to our product candidates or development programs. As a result, we expect to continue to incur net losses and negative cash flows for the foreseeable future. These net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

As we continue to build our business, we expect our financial condition and operating results may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Accordingly, you should not rely upon the results of any particular quarterly or annual period as indications of future operating performance. If we are unable to develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates either alone or with collaborators, or if revenues from any product candidate that receives marketing approval are insufficient, we will not achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability. If we are unable to achieve and then maintain profitability, the value of our securities will be adversely affected.

We will need to obtain substantial additional funding to complete the development and any commercialization of our current and any future product candidates, which may cause dilution to our stockholders. If we are unable to raise this capital when needed, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research and development programs or other operations.

The development of biopharmaceutical product candidates is capital-intensive. We expect to spend substantial amounts to advance our product candidates into clinical development and to complete the clinical development of, seek regulatory approvals for and commercialize our product candidates, if approved. We will require additional capital, which we may raise through public or private equity or debt financings or other capital sources, which may include strategic collaborations and other strategic arrangements with third parties, to enable us to complete the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, as a public company, we will incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. Our failure to raise capital as and when

needed would have a negative effect on our financial condition and our ability to pursue our business strategy. In addition, attempting to secure additional financing may divert the time and attention of our management from day-to-day activities and harm our development efforts. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate certain of our research and development programs.

Our operations have consumed significant amounts of cash since inception. As of December 31, 2024, our cash, cash equivalents and investments were $185.4 million. Based on our current cash, cash equivalents and investments, we estimate that our funds will be sufficient to enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements at least through the end of 2026. This estimate is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Changing circumstances could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. Because the length of time and activities associated with successful development of our product candidates is highly uncertain, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require for development and any marketing and commercialization activities.

Our future funding requirements, both near and long-term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

•

the type, number, scope, progress, expansions, results, costs and timing of, discovery, preclinical studies and clinical trials of our current and future product candidates, including AlloNK (AB-101), AB-201 and AB-205;

•

the costs and timing of manufacturing for our product candidates, including continuing to develop our own manufacturing capabilities;

•

the outcome, timing and cost of meeting regulatory requirements established by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities;

•

the cost of obtaining, maintaining and protecting our intellectual property portfolio, including filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing our patent claims and other intellectual property rights;

•

the cost of establishing a sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any product candidates for which we may obtain marketing approval;

•

the cost and timing of completion of commercial-scale manufacturing activities;

•

the cost of making royalty, milestone or other payments under current and any future in-license agreements;

•

the timing and amount of the milestone or other payments made to us under our current or any future collaboration agreements;

•

costs associated with growing our workforce and retaining and motivating our employees;

•

the initiation, progress, timing and results of our commercialization of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale;

•

costs associated with any products or technologies that we may in-license or acquire;

•

the costs associated with being a public company; and

•

our implementation of additional internal systems and infrastructure, including operational, financial and management information systems.

In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations, even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a holder of common stock. Debt financing and preferred equity financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic

alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may be required to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

Risks Related to the Discovery and Development of our Product Candidates

Our approach to the development of NK cell-based product candidates is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value, or if competing technological approaches will limit the commercial value of our product candidates or render our platform obsolete.

Our success depends on our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates utilizing our NK cell therapy platform, including manufacturing capabilities, which leverages relatively novel technologies. While we have had favorable preclinical and early clinical study results based on our platform, we are early in our development efforts and may not succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety for any product candidates in clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter. Our understanding of NK cell biology is continuously evolving and this is particularly true in relation to autoimmune diseases where there is limited clinical data available. In particular, our approach in developing treatments for autoimmune diseases with NK cell-based therapies is novel and we have limited experience in doing so as our resources and processes have historically been focused on the development of NK cell-based therapies for cancer. We may also experience timeline delays or serious adverse events, and our product candidates may never become commercialized. All of our product candidates will require significant additional clinical and non-clinical development, review and approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities in one or more jurisdictions, substantial investment, and significant marketing efforts before they can be successfully commercialized. Our methodology and novel approach to cellular therapy may be unsuccessful in identifying additional product candidates, and any product candidates based on our platform may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may necessitate additional clinical testing, or make the product candidates unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval. Further, because all of our product candidates and development programs are based on our NK cell therapy platform, adverse developments with respect to one of our programs may have a significant adverse impact on the actual or perceived likelihood of success and value of our other programs. For example, if our clinical trials of AlloNK encounter safety, efficacy or manufacturing problems, development delays, regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans for our other product candidates in our pipeline could be significantly impaired.

The FDA has cautioned consumers about potential safety risks associated with T-cell therapies. The FDA has approved only a few cell-based therapies for commercialization and to our knowledge, no NK cell-based therapy has been approved for commercial use by any regulatory authority. Additionally, human primary cells are subject to donor-to-donor variability, which can make standardization more difficult. Understanding and addressing variability in the quality of a donor’s cells, could ultimately affect our ability to produce product in a reliable and consistent manner and treat certain patients. As a result, the development and commercialization pathway for our product candidates may be subject to increased uncertainty, as compared to the pathway for new conventional drugs.

In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies. Our future success will depend in part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with our NK cell-based approach. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change in utilizing our platform to create and develop product candidates, we may be unable to compete effectively. Our competitors may render our approach obsolete, or limit the commercial value of our product candidates, by advances in existing technological approaches or the development of new or different approaches, potentially eliminating the advantages in our manufacturing process that we believe we derive from our platform. By contrast, adverse developments with respect to other companies that attempt to use a similar approach to our approach may adversely impact the actual or perceived value of our platform and potential of our product candidates.

There is currently no cell therapy approved in the United States or elsewhere in the world for the treatment of any autoimmune disease, and our research and development activities related to AlloNK for treatment of autoimmune diseases, such as SLE, LN, RA, PV, GPA / MPA, and other autoimmune diseases, may never lead to an approved product.

We are evaluating AlloNK in combination with B-cell targeted mAbs to treat autoimmune diseases, such as SLE, LN, RA, PV, GPA / MPA. There is currently no cell therapy approved in the United States or elsewhere in the world for the treatment of any autoimmune disease. We cannot be certain that our approach will lead to the development of an approvable or marketable product. We may not succeed in demonstrating safety and efficacy of AlloNK in combination with B-cell targeted mAbs for the treatment of autoimmune diseases in our ongoing or anticipated clinical trials or in larger-scale clinical trials. Advancing AlloNK in development creates significant challenges for us, including:

•

obtaining marketing approval, as the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities have yet to approve a cell therapy for the treatment of any autoimmune disease;

•

if AlloNK in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb is approved, educating medical personnel regarding the potential efficacy and safety benefits, as well as the challenges, of incorporating our product into their clinical practice; and

•

establishing the sales and marketing capabilities upon obtaining any marketing approvals to gain market acceptance.

Our product candidates are based on novel technologies, which makes it difficult to predict the time and cost of developing product candidates and obtaining regulatory approval for any product candidates that we develop.

The clinical trial requirements of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities and the criteria these regulators use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for product candidates such as ours can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known, or more extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates.

Regulatory requirements in the United States and in other countries governing cell therapy products are evolving and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may change the requirements, or identify different regulatory pathways, for approval for any of our product candidates. For example, within the FDA, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (CBER) restructured and created a new Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies to better align its oversight activities with FDA Centers for Drugs and Medical Devices. It is possible that over time new or different divisions may be established or be granted the responsibility for regulating cell therapy products, including NK cell-based products, such as ours. As a result, we may be required to change our regulatory strategy or to modify our applications for regulatory approval, which could delay and impair our ability to complete the preclinical and clinical development and manufacture of, and obtain regulatory approval for, our product candidates. Changes in FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities and advisory groups, or any new requirements or guidelines they promulgate, may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development and manufacturing costs, lead to changes in regulatory pathways, positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions.

We have concentrated our research and development efforts on utilizing NK cell-based therapies. To date, the FDA has approved only a few cell-based therapies for commercialization and no NK cell-based therapy has been approved for commercial use by any regulatory authority. The processes and requirements imposed by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may cause delays and additional costs in obtaining approvals for marketing authorization for our product candidates. Because our platform is novel, and cell-based therapies are relatively new, especially as potential treatments for autoimmune diseases, regulatory authorities may lack experience in evaluating product candidates like our product candidates. This novelty may lengthen the regulatory review process, including the time it takes for the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review our INDs or comparable foreign applications if and when submitted, increase our development costs and delay or

prevent commercialization of our product candidates. Additionally, advancing novel immune-oncology therapies creates significant challenges for us, including:

•

educating medical personnel regarding the potential side-effect profile of our product candidates and, as the clinical program progresses, on observed side effects with the product candidates;

•

training medical personnel;

•

enrolling sufficient numbers of patients in clinical trials; and

•

continuing to develop a manufacturing process to support the clinical testing of our product candidates.

We must be able to overcome these challenges in order for us to develop, commercialize and manufacture our product candidates.

As we advance our product candidates, we will be required to consult with the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities and our product candidates will likely be reviewed by an FDA advisory committee. We also must comply with applicable requirements, and if we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of our product candidates. Delays or unexpected costs in obtaining, or the failure to obtain, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could impair our ability to generate sufficient product revenues to maintain our business.

In addition, either advances or adverse developments in preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted by others in the field of cell therapy products, and cellular immunotherapies in particular, may cause the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to revise the requirements for approval of any product candidates we may develop, and may otherwise negatively affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. The regulatory review committees and advisory groups described above and the new guidelines they promulgate may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of these treatment candidates, or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. As we advance our research programs and develop future product candidates, we will be required to consult with these regulatory and advisory groups and to comply with applicable guidelines. If we fail to do so, we may be required to delay or discontinue development of any product candidates we identify and develop.

We are early in our development efforts and are substantially dependent on the success of our lead product candidate, AlloNK, which is in early clinical development. Although we have other product candidates in our pipeline being developed by our partners, all of our other internally developed product candidates are in the preclinical or discovery stage. If we are unable to advance our product candidates in clinical development, obtain regulatory approval and ultimately commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We are in the early stages of our development efforts and are substantially dependent on the success of our lead product candidate, AlloNK, which is in early clinical development. Although we have other product candidates in our pipeline being developed by our partners, all of our other internallydeveloped product candidates are still in the preclinical or discovery stages. We have not yet completed any clinical trials for any product candidate. We will need to progress AlloNK through our recently initiated trial and progress our other early product candidates through preclinical studies and submit INDs to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory applications to applicable foreign regulatory authorities prior to initiating clinical trials.

Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:

•

successful enrollment in, and completion of, clinical trials with favorable results;

•

completion of preclinical studies with favorable results;

•

sufficiency of our financial and other resources to complete the necessary preclinical studies and clinical trials;

•

allowance to proceed with clinical trials under INDs by the FDA or under similar regulatory submissions by applicable foreign regulatory authorities for the conduct of clinical trials of our product candidates and our proposed design of future clinical trials;

•

demonstrating the safety and efficacy of our product candidates to the satisfaction of the FDA and other applicable foreign regulatory authorities;

•

receipt of regulatory approvals from applicable regulatory authorities, including new drug applications (NDAs) from the FDA and approvals from comparable foreign regulatory authorities and maintaining such approvals;

•

making arrangements with third-party manufacturers, or manufacturing sufficient quantities of product candidates for clinical and commercial use using our own facilities;

•

establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and launching commercial sales of our products, if and when approved, whether alone or in collaboration with others;

•

establishing and maintaining patent and trade secret protection or regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates;

•

acceptance of any products we develop and their benefits and uses, if and when approved, by patients, the medical community and third-party payors;

•

effectively competing with other therapies;

•

obtaining and maintaining healthcare coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors;

•

maintaining an acceptable safety profile of our products following approval; and

•

building and maintaining an organization of people who can successfully develop our product candidates.

We have not yet succeeded and may not succeed in demonstrating efficacy and safety for any product candidates in clinical trials or in obtaining marketing approval thereafter. Given our early stage of development, it will take several years before we can demonstrate the safety and efficacy of a product candidate sufficient to warrant approval for commercialization, if we can do so at all. If we are unable to develop, or obtain marketing approval for, or, if approved, successfully commercialize our product candidates, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

Current clinical data regarding the efficacy of NK cell therapies against autoimmune diseases are limited, raising uncertainties about the therapeutic benefits of treatments like AlloNK for conditions such as SLE, LN, RA, PV, GPA / MPA and other autoimmune diseases. Moreover, these therapies may not prove to be competitive compared to existing treatments for autoimmune diseases.

While we believe in the potential of our allogeneic NK cell-based product candidate, AlloNK, in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb may have a clinical benefit for autoimmune diseases, such as SLE, LN, RA, PV and GPA / MPA, the use of NK cell-based therapies in combination with mAbs represents a novel approach for the treatment of autoimmune disease, and is supported by limited clinical data. To date, the FDA has not approved any cell therapies for autoimmune diseases, adding to the uncertainty surrounding our ongoing clinical trials.

Our belief that AlloNK may be effective as a treatment for autoimmune disease is based on our interpretation of positive clinical data from academic groups and commercial entities using auto-CAR-T or CAR-NK in a limited autoimmune disease patient cohort, preliminary data from our collaborator Affimed in their ongoing investigation of AlloNK in a Phase 2 trial in combination with acimtamig, a CD30-targeted NK cell engager, in CD30+ Hodgkin lymphoma (HL), as well as our own preliminary data from our ongoing Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AlloNK in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory B-NHL, which demonstrated complete responses in B-NHL patients as measured by imaging of tumor lesions. We have made certain assumptions regarding the approach responsible for the preliminary activity shown in the reported studies and how that approach and our own preliminary data from our Phase 1/2 clinical trial in patients with aggressive B-NHL will translate to patients with autoimmune diseases, such as LN, which may not be correct.

We cannot be certain whether AlloNK in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb will effectively treat LN, other manifestations of SLE, RA, PV, GPA / MPA or any autoimmune disease for that matter, nor can we guarantee its competitiveness against auto-CAR-T. Additionally, we face competition from numerous cell therapy companies with strong oncology backgrounds, all pursuing development programs in autoimmune diseases, which could hinder our efforts to successfully develop and commercialize AlloNK in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb.

If our clinical trials reveal insufficient activity or unfavorable tolerability of AlloNK in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb against autoimmune diseases, such as SLE, LN, RA, PV and GPA / MPA, encounter delays in advancing AlloNK through clinical development, or if we struggle to compete with other companies in developing and marketing AlloNK in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb, it would significantly impact the commercial prospects of AlloNK, as well as our business, financial condition and growth outlook.

We are developing, and in the future may develop, other product candidates in combination with other therapies, which exposes us to additional risks.

We are developing AlloNK for combination with approved B-cell targeted mAbs. For example, our ongoing Phase 1/2 clinical trial is administering AlloNK in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory B-NHL. Beyond rituximab and other anti-CD20 mAbs, we have already conducted numerous preclinical studies in which we have shown cytotoxic activity of AlloNK in combination with other approved B-cell targeted mAb therapies, such as anti-CD19 and anti-CD38 mAbs. Even if any product candidate we develop were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with our product candidate. There is also a risk that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these other existing therapies. For example, the other therapies may lead to toxicities that are improperly attributed to our product candidates or the combination of our product candidates with other therapies may result in negative or inconclusive results that the product candidate or other therapy does not produce when used alone or in combination with a different therapy. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially. Additionally, the results observed in combinations of any of our product candidates with another therapy may not be predictive of future results of combinations of our product candidates in other combinations or indications.

We may also evaluate our future product candidates in combination with one or more other therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market any product candidate we develop in combination with any such unapproved therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval.

If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve these other drugs or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues arise with, the drugs we choose to evaluate in combination with any product candidate we develop, we may be unable to obtain approval.

Interim, topline and preliminary data from our preclinical studies or clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may not be predictive of future results and may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures, which could result in material changes to the final data.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, topline or preliminary data from our preclinical studies, clinical trials or planned clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data. The results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the interim, topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Interim, topline and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, such data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our clinical trials. Interim, topline, or preliminary data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient

enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between interim, topline or preliminary data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects.

Further, others, including regulatory authorities, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is the material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product, product candidate or our business. If the interim, topline or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others including comparable foreign regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition.

Moreover, results from previous preclinical studies or clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future clinical trial results, and interim results of a clinical trial are not necessarily indicative of final results. Our product candidates may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy in clinical development despite positive results in preclinical studies of our product candidates or having successfully advanced through initial clinical trials.

Clinical trials are expensive, time-consuming, difficult to design and implement, and have an uncertain outcome. Further, we may encounter substantial delays in our clinical trials.

The clinical trials and manufacturing of our product candidates are subject to extensive and rigorous review and regulation by numerous government authorities in the United States and in other countries where we intend to test and market our product candidates. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for use in each target indication. In particular, because our product candidates are subject to regulation as biological drug products, we will need to demonstrate that they are safe, pure and potent for use in their target indications. Each product candidate must demonstrate an adequate risk versus benefit profile in its intended patient population and for its intended use.

Clinical testing is expensive and takes many years to complete, and is subject to uncertainty. Our planned clinical trials may not be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. Delays and failures can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Even if our future clinical trials are completed as planned, their results may not support the safety and effectiveness of our product candidates for their targeted indications or support continued clinical development of such product candidates. Our future clinical trial results may not be successful.

In addition, even if our planned trials are successfully completed, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not interpret the results as we do, and more trials could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. To the extent that the results of the trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates.

To date, we have not completed any clinical trials required for the approval of our product candidates. We may experience delays in conducting any clinical trials, and we do not know whether our clinical trials will begin on time, will need to be redesigned, will recruit and enroll patients on time or have data readouts or be completed on schedule, or at all. Events that may prevent successful or timely commencement, readouts, and completion of clinical development and preclinical studies include:

•

inability to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology, or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation of clinical trials;

•

delays in sufficiently developing, characterizing or controlling a manufacturing process suitable for advanced clinical trials, or failure to do so;

•

delays in reaching agreement with the FDA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities as to the design or implementation of our clinical trials, or failure to do so;

•

delays in or failure to obtain regulatory approval to commence a clinical trial;

•

delays in or failure to reach an agreement on acceptable terms with clinical trial sites or prospective contract research organizations (CROs) the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different clinical trial sites;

•

delays in or failure to obtain institutional review board (IRB) approval or positive ethics committee opinion at each site;

•

delays in or failure to recruit suitable patients to participate in a clinical trial;

•

delays in or failure to develop and validate the companion diagnostic to be used in a clinical trial, if applicable;

•

delays in or failure to have patients complete a clinical trial or return for post-treatment follow-up;

•

clinical sites, CROs or other third parties deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;

•

failure to perform in accordance with the FDA’s GCP requirements, or applicable regulatory guidelines in other countries;

•

the serious, life-threatening diseases of the patients enrolled in our clinical trials, who may die or suffer adverse medical events during the course of the trials for reasons that may not be related to our product candidates;

•

failure in addressing patient safety concerns that arise during the course of a trial, including occurrence of adverse events associated with the product candidate that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits;

•

failure to add a sufficient number of clinical trial sites; or

•

failure to manufacture sufficient quantities of product candidate for use in clinical trials.

•

We may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our product candidates or significantly increase the cost of such trials, including:

•

we may experience changes in regulatory requirements or guidance, or receive feedback from regulatory authorities that requires us to modify the design of our clinical trials;

•

clinical trials of our product candidates may produce negative or inconclusive results, and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional clinical trials or abandon development programs;

•

the number of patients required for clinical trials of our product candidates may be larger than we anticipate, enrollment in these clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or participants may drop out of these clinical trials at a higher rate than we anticipate;

•

our third-party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all;

•

we or our investigators might have to suspend or terminate clinical trials of our product candidates for various reasons, including non-compliance with regulatory requirements, a finding that our product candidates have undesirable side effects or other unexpected characteristics, a finding that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

•

adverse events suffered by clinical trial participants that may ultimately be determined to be unrelated to our product candidates;

•

the cost of clinical trials of our product candidates may be greater than we anticipate and we may elect not to cover the costs;

•

the supply or quality of our product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates may be insufficient or inadequate;

•

regulators may revise the requirements for approving our product candidates, or such requirements may not be as we anticipate; and

•

any future collaborators that conduct clinical trials may face any of the above issues, and may conduct clinical trials in ways they view as advantageous to them but that are suboptimal for us.

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our product candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we may:

•

incur unplanned costs;

•

be delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates or not obtain marketing approval at all;

•

obtain marketing approval in some countries and not in others;

•

obtain marketing approval for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired;

•

obtain marketing approval with labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings, including boxed warnings;

•

be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; or

•

have the product removed from the market after obtaining marketing approval.

We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the institutional review boards (IRBs) or ethics committees of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (DSMB) for such trial or by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. These authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial.

Our lead product candidate, AlloNK, will require extensive clinical testing before we are prepared to submit a BLA or MAA for regulatory approval. We cannot predict with any certainty if or when we might complete the clinical development for our product candidates and submit a BLA or MAA for regulatory approval of any of our product candidates or whether any such BLA or MAA will be approved. We may also seek feedback from the FDA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities on our clinical development program, and the FDA or such other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not provide such feedback on a timely basis, or such feedback may not be favorable, which could further delay our development programs.

We also cannot predict with any certainty whether or when we might complete a given clinical trial. If we experience delays in the commencement or completion of our clinical trials, or if we terminate a clinical trial prior to completion, the commercial prospects of our product candidates could be harmed, and our ability to generate revenues from our product candidates may be delayed. In addition, any delays in our clinical trials could increase our costs, slow down the development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Our product candidates may cause serious adverse events or undesirable side effects or have other properties that may delay or prevent regulatory approval, cause us to suspend or discontinue clinical trials, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval, if any.

We have not yet completed any human clinical trials of our product candidates. Undesirable side effects that may be caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label than anticipated or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics.

While we believe the interim data reported to date from our Phase 1/2 B-NHL clinical trial indicate that NK cell-based therapies may have the potential to be better tolerated as compared to T cell based therapies due to biologic differences between these cell types there remains a risk of serious adverse events. In addition, historically, clinical trials using NK cell therapies in human subjects have been well-tolerated; however, it is possible that adverse events, including CRS, neurotoxicity or graft-versus-host disease will occur in human subjects during clinical trials.

Furthermore, clinical trial results could reveal an unacceptable severity or incidence of other adverse events, including heart and lung problems or life-threatening infections. Any such findings could cause delays in completion or cancellation of clinical programs. Furthermore, in some instances, the diseases we may be seeking to treat may be less serious than the later stage cancers traditionally being treated with cell therapies or other immunotherapy products. Therefore, we believe the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may apply a different risk-benefit threshold to our product candidates pursuing autoimmune indications such that any potential harmful side effects that may outweigh the benefits of such product candidates would require us to cease clinical trials or abandon or limit our development of these product candidates or would cause the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to deny marketing applications for these product candidates. We believe for the FDA and other regulatory authorities may weigh adverse events in the autoimmune patient populations being pursued with cell-based therapies, such as in our ongoing clinical trials, may be lower than it is in oncology, and the risks of negative impact from these toxicities may therefore be higher for our autoimmune programs than for our oncology programs or the oncology programs of others.

If unacceptable side effects or deaths arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, the IRBs or ethics committees at the institutions in which our studies are conducted, DSMB or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. For example, the FDA put our Phase 1/2 clinical trial of AlloNK in combination with rituximab in patients with relapsed or refractory B-NHL on clinical hold in April 2021 due to a patient death and lifted the clinical hold in June 2021 after our investigation and amendments to the clinical trial protocol. Although there was no definitive cause of death, the autopsy findings included widespread metastatic disease and cardiovascular disease, and concluded that the death was possibly due to cardiac arrhythmia. The principal investigator determined that this serious adverse event was not related to AlloNK. We may observe undesirable side effects and we may not be able to complete a clinical trial for AlloNK or any of our other product candidates without further delays or at all. Further undesirable side effects, dose-limiting toxicity events, or deaths in clinical trials with our product candidates may cause the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to place a clinical hold on the associated clinical trials, to require additional studies, dose de-escalation, or additional protocol amendments, or otherwise to delay or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects could also affect site initiation, patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

We study our product candidates in patient populations with significant comorbidities, and these patients may also receive treatment with cytotoxic lymphodepletion agents, cytokines, monoclonal antibodies and/or other treatments that may result in deaths or serious adverse or unacceptable side effects and require us to abandon or limit our clinical development activities.

Patients treated with our product candidates in clinical trials may also receive treatment with cytotoxic lymphodepletion agents, cytokines, monoclonal antibodies and/or other treatments, and may therefore experience side effects or adverse events, including death, that are unrelated to our product candidates. While these side effects or adverse events may be unrelated to our product candidates, they may still affect the success of our clinical studies. The inclusion of seriously ill patients in our autoimmune clinical trials, and critically ill patients in our oncology clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to underlying disease or to other therapies or medications that such patients may receive. Any of these events could prevent us from advancing our product candidates through clinical development, and from obtaining regulatory approval, and would impair our ability to commercialize our product candidates. Any inability to advance our existing product candidates or any other product candidate through clinical development would have a material adverse effect on our business, and the value of our common stock would decline.

Enrollment and retention of patients in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process subject to various external factors beyond our control that may cause delays or complications.

The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until its conclusion. We may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for our product candidates if we are unable to locate and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials to such trials’ conclusion as required by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We may experience difficulty in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a number of reasons. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including:

•

the patient eligibility criteria defined in the protocol;

•

the size and nature of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s endpoints;

•

the proximity of patients to study sites;

•

the design of the trial;

•

our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with appropriate competencies and experience;

•

clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including new products that may be approved for the indications we are investigating;

•

our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents for participation in our clinical trials; and

•

the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will not remain in the trial through the completion of evaluation.

Competing with numerous ongoing trials and established therapies poses a challenge in recruiting patients. Our clinical trials may also compete with other clinical trials of product candidates that are in a similar cellular immunotherapy area as our product candidates, and this competition could reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Additionally, for our ongoing or any future clinical trials of AlloNK for the treatment of other autoimmune diseases, the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, so we may conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial site. Recent announcements of clinical trial plans by various cell therapy companies targeting autoimmune diseases, including indications we are pursuing, has resulted in competition for investigators and patients in our ongoing clinical trials, and may continue to intensify future competition in any other AlloNK clinical trials we may initiate in the future for the treatment of other autoimmune diseases. Failure to enroll a sufficient number of patients promptly could lead to delays or failure in completing our trials, hindering the development and commercialization of our product candidates within certain patient subgroups or altogether.

Our preclinical programs may experience delays or may never advance to clinical trials, which would adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize these programs on a timely basis or at all.

In order to obtain FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority approval to market a new biological product we must demonstrate proof of safety, purity and potency, or efficacy, in humans. To meet these requirements, we will have to conduct adequate and well-controlled clinical trials. AlloNK is our only product candidate to enter clinical development. Before we can commence clinical trials for additional product candidates, we must complete extensive preclinical testing and studies that support our planned INDs in the United States and comparable applications outside the United States.

We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies and cannot predict if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies will ultimately support the further development of our programs. As a result, we may not submit INDs or similar applications for our preclinical programs within our anticipated timelines, if at all, and submission of INDs or similar applications may not result in the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities allowing clinical trials to begin.

Conducting preclinical testing is a lengthy, time-consuming and expensive process. The length of time may vary substantially according to the type, complexity and novelty of the program, and often can be several years or more per program. Any delays in preclinical testing and studies conducted by us or potential future partners may cause us to incur additional operating expenses. The commencement and rate of completion of preclinical studies for a product candidate may be delayed by many factors, including, for example:

•

inability to generate sufficient preclinical or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation of clinical trials;

•

delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory authorities on study design; and

•

the FDA (or comparable foreign regulatory authorities) not allowing us to rely on previous findings of safety and efficacy for other similar but approved products and published scientific literature.

Moreover, because standards for pre-clinical assessment are evolving and may change rapidly, even if we reach an agreement with the FDA on a pre-IND proposal, the FDA may not accept the IND submissions as presented, in which the clinical trial timeline could be delayed.

We may not identify or discover other product candidates and may fail to capitalize on programs or product candidates that may present a greater commercial opportunity or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Our business depends upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize product candidates. A key element of our strategy is to discover and develop additional product candidates based upon our NK cell therapy platform. We are seeking to do so through our collaborations with GC Cell and Affimed, and may also explore additional strategic collaborations for the discovery of new product candidates. Research programs to identify product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources, whether or not any product candidates are ultimately identified. In addition, targets for different autoimmune diseases or cancers may require changes to our manufacturing processes, which may slow down development of or make it impossible to manufacture our product candidates. Our research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for many reasons, including the following:

•

the research methodology or technology platform used may not be successful in identifying potential product candidates;

•

competitors may develop alternatives that render our product candidates obsolete or less attractive;

•

we may choose to cease development if we determine that clinical results do not show promise;

•

product candidates we develop may nevertheless be covered by third parties’ patents or other exclusive rights;

•

a product candidate may be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate it is unlikely to be effective or otherwise does not meet applicable regulatory criteria; and

•

a product candidate may not be accepted as safe and effective by patients, the medical community or third-party payors.

Because we have limited resources, we must choose to pursue and fund the development of specific types of treatment, select certain other therapies to test in combination with our product candidates or treatment for a specific type of autoimmune disease or cancer, and we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with certain programs or product candidates or combinations or for indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our estimates regarding the potential market for our product candidates could be inaccurate, and if we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through strategic collaboration, licensing or other arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. Alternatively, we may allocate internal resources to a product candidate in a therapeutic area in which it would have been more advantageous to enter into a partnering arrangement.

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon or delay our development efforts with respect to a particular product candidate or fail to develop a potentially successful product candidate.

Results of any patient who receives our product candidate in an IIT should not be viewed as representative of how the product candidate will perform in our clinical trials and may not be able to be used to establish safety or efficacy for regulatory approval.

Before seeking regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate statistically significant evidence of both safety and effectiveness in well-controlled clinical trials. However, we do not control the design, administration, or timing of IITs. We rely on investigators and physicians to ensure their compliance with clinical and regulatory requirements when using our product candidates for these trials. Failure to comply could expose us to liability.

While IITs may provide valuable insights, their results cannot be used to establish safety or efficacy for regulatory approval. In fact, they may identify concerns that could impact our findings or ongoing trials, potentially delaying or jeopardizing regulatory approval from the FDA or other regulatory bodies. If results from IITs differ from our sponsored trials or raise concerns, regulatory authorities may question our sponsored trial results and subject them to greater scrutiny. This could result in the need for additional clinical data, delaying clinical development and approval of our product candidates.

Moreover, the patient population in such trials is at high risk for serious adverse events. If these events are attributed to our product candidates, it could negatively impact their safety profile, leading to delays or failure in obtaining regulatory approval or successfully commercializing our drug candidates. Additionally, our supply capabilities may limit patient enrollment in these trials. We may need to restructure or pause supply to enroll sufficient patients in our sponsored trials, potentially leading to adverse publicity or other disruptions.

In summary, while IITs offer valuable insights, they also pose regulatory and operational challenges that could impact our ability to bring our product candidates to market.

The affected populations for our product candidates may be smaller than we or third parties currently project, which may affect the addressable markets for our product candidates.

We select the targets for development of our product candidates based on a number of factors, including the estimated patient populations where we believe there is a meaningful addressable market opportunity. However, our projections of the number of people who have the diseases we are seeking to treat, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are estimates based on our knowledge and understanding of these diseases. The total addressable market opportunity for our product candidates will ultimately depend upon a number of factors, including the diagnosis and treatment criteria included in the final label, if approved for sale in specified indications, acceptance by the medical community, patient access, alternative therapies and product pricing and reimbursement. For example, we intend to prioritize

evaluation and seeking approval for AlloNK in combination with a B-cell targeted mAb in autoimmune diseases. Incidence and prevalence estimates are frequently based on information and assumptions that are not exact and may not be appropriate, and the methodology is forward-looking and speculative. The process we have used in developing an estimated incidence and prevalence range for the indications we are targeting has involved collating limited data from multiple sources. Accordingly, the incidence and prevalence estimates we use should be viewed with caution. Further, the data and statistical information we use, including estimates derived from them, may differ from information and estimates made by our competitors or from current or future studies conducted by independent sources.

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, cleared or approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. Even though the FDA has since resumed standard inspectional operations, any resurgence of the virus or emergence of new variants may lead to further inspectional or administrative delays. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs or other public health crisis were to occur that prevented the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Manufacturing and Our Reliance on Third Parties

If third parties that we rely on to conduct clinical trials do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, comply with regulatory requirements or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain marketing approval for or commercialize our product candidates.

We do not independently conduct clinical trials. We rely on medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories and other third parties, such as CROs, to conduct or otherwise support clinical trials for our product candidates. In addition, our partner GC Cell will be engaging in initial clinical development for AB-201, and has dosed initial patient for AB-205 outside our licensed territories to generate initial proof of concept data. We rely heavily on these parties for execution of clinical trials for our product candidates and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal and regulatory requirements and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs and other third parties will not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. For any violations of laws and regulations during the conduct of our clinical trials, we could be subject to untitled letters, warning letters or enforcement action that may include civil penalties up to and including criminal prosecution.

We and the third parties on which we rely for clinical trials are required to comply with regulations and requirements, including GCP for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate, and that the trial patients are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials and their rights are protected. These regulations are enforced by the FDA, the competent authorities of the EU Member States, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for any drugs in clinical development. The FDA and competent authorities of EU Member States enforces GCP requirements through periodic inspections of clinical trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or these third parties fail to comply with applicable GCP, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection,

the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities will determine that any of our future clinical trials will comply with GCP. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product candidates produced under current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) regulations. Our failure or the failure of these third parties to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the marketing approval process and could also subject us to enforcement action. We also are required to register certain ongoing clinical trials and provide certain information, including information relating to the trial’s protocol, on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specific timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

Although we intend to design the clinical trials for our product candidates, we will rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. As a result, many important aspects of our clinical development, including clinical trial conduct and timing, will be outside of our direct control. Our reliance on third parties to conduct future clinical trials will also result in less direct control over the management of data developed through clinical trials than would be the case if we were relying entirely upon our own staff.

Communicating with outside parties can also be challenging, potentially leading to mistakes, as well as difficulties in coordinating activities. Outside parties may:

•

have staffing difficulties;

•

fail to comply with contractual obligations;

•

experience regulatory compliance issues;

•

undergo changes in priorities or become financially distressed; or

•

form relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors.

If third parties do not perform our clinical trials in a satisfactory manner, breach their obligations to us or fail to comply with regulatory requirements, we would be unable to rely on clinical data collected by these third parties and may be required to repeat, extend the duration of, or increase the size of any clinical trials we conduct, which could significantly delay commercialization and require significantly greater expenditures.

If any of our relationships with these third parties terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative third parties on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. If third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain are compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, any clinical trials such third parties are associated with may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, we believe that our financial results and the commercial prospects for our product candidates in the subject indication would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected the interpretation of the trial. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, refusal to accept or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of our product candidates.

We may, from time to time, such as for our ongoing clinical trials, establish partnerships in relation to our clinical trials, receiving advisory services and other support from third parties. Although we believe that these partnerships will enable us to accelerate the development of our product candidates and clinical trials, we cannot guarantee that such collaborations will be successful and, in the event they are not, we may lose our competitive advantage and/or incur additional costs.

Our collaboration agreements with Affimed, GC Cell and any future collaborations with third parties to develop or commercialize our product candidates, mean that our prospects with respect to the product candidates involved will depend in significant part on the success of those collaborations.

Our collaborations, including our collaborations with Affimed and GC Cell, and any future collaborations we may enter with third parties, could result in the following risks:

•

collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations;

•

collaborators could fail to conduct trials on the timeline we expect or otherwise fail to support our partnered trials;

•

collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our products or product candidates;

•

collaborators could encounter safety or efficacy problems, manufacturing problems, developmental delays, regulatory issues or other problems with our partnered trials;

•

collaborators may not properly enforce, maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatened litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential litigation, or other intellectual property proceedings;

•

disputes may arise between a collaborator and us that cause the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of the product candidate, or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;

•

if a present or future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program under such collaboration could be delayed, diminished or terminated; and

•

collaboration agreements may restrict our right to independently pursue new product candidates.

In addition, if conflicts arise between our collaborators and us, our collaborators may act in a manner adverse to us and could limit our ability to implement our strategies. Future collaborators may develop, either alone or with others, products in related fields that are competitive with the products or potential products that are the subject of these collaborations. Competing products, either developed by the collaborators or to which the collaborators have rights, may result in the withdrawal of support for our product candidates. Our collaborators may preclude us from entering into collaborations with their competitors, fail to obtain timely regulatory approvals, terminate their agreements with us prematurely or fail to devote sufficient resources to the development and commercialization of products. Any of these developments could harm our product development efforts.

As a result, if we enter into collaboration agreements and strategic partnerships or license our intellectual property, products or businesses, such as our agreements with GC Cell and Affimed, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business. Following a strategic transaction or license, we may not achieve the revenue or specific net income that justifies such transaction.

We may seek to form collaborations in the future with respect to our product candidates, but may not be able to do so, which may cause us to alter our development and commercialization plans.

The advancement of our product candidates and development programs and the potential commercialization of our current and future product candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses. For some of our programs, we may seek to collaborate with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to develop and commercialize such product candidates, such as our collaborations with Affimed. Any of these relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing stockholders, or disrupt our management and business.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for other collaborations will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the progress of our clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge, and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. Further, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for future product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view them as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy. Any delays in entering into new collaborations or strategic partnership agreements related to any product candidate we develop could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.

The manufacture of cell therapy products is novel, complex and subject to multiple risks. We could experience manufacturing problems, and/or we could be required to or choose to modify our manufacturing processes, which could result in delays in the development or commercialization of our product candidates or otherwise harm our business.

Our product candidates utilize primary human NK cells, and the process of manufacturing such product candidates is complex, highly regulated and subject to numerous risks. As a result of these complexities, manufacturing our cellular therapy product candidates is generally more complicated than traditional small-molecule chemical compounds or biologics. In addition, our cost of goods development is at an early stage. The actual cost to manufacture and process our product candidates could be greater than we expect and could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of our product candidates. Moreover, the manufacturing processes for certain of our existing CAR-NK cell product candidates have not been tested at full scale.

Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in our product candidates or in any of the manufacturing facilities in which products or other materials are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination.

We plan to make changes to our manufacturing processes for various reasons, such as to control costs, meet new or additional regulatory requirements, achieve scale, decrease processing time, increase manufacturing success rate, to facilitate the development of future product candidates or for other reasons, and we cannot be sure that even minor changes in these processes will not cause our current or future product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of our ongoing and planned clinical trials or the performance of the product once commercialized. Changes to our processes made during the course of clinical development will require us to amend our IND submission to the FDA to show the comparability of the product used in earlier clinical phases or at earlier portions of a trial to the product used in later clinical phases or later portions of the trial. Other changes to our manufacturing processes made before or after commercialization could require us to show the comparability of the resulting product to the product candidate used in the clinical trials using earlier processes. This could require us to collect additional nonclinical or clinical data from any modified process prior to obtaining marketing approval for the product candidate produced with such modified process. If such data are not ultimately comparable to that seen in the earlier trials or earlier in the same trial in terms of safety or efficacy, we may be required to make further changes to our processes and/or undertake additional clinical testing, either of which could significantly delay the clinical development or commercialization of the associated product candidate, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may experience unforeseen events during, or as a result of, ramping up our manufacturing process that could result in delays in manufacturing sufficient quantities of our product candidates or otherwise harm our business.

We currently rely on GC Cell for the manufacturing of certain of our product candidates. While we have built our own clinical manufacturing facility and may decide to operate our manufacturing facility at commercial-scale, we may encounter delays, quality or other issues if and when we begin to use our manufacturing facility for supply, and will continue to rely on GC Cell at least partially for manufacturing of our product candidates in the near term.

We currently rely on GC Cell to manufacture certain of our product candidates. If GC Cell were to breach their agreement with us or otherwise fail to perform for any reason, including due to the loss of key members of GC Cell’s management or other key employees, we likely would experience delays while we identify and qualify a replacement manufacturer and we may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us, which may make it more difficult for us to develop our product candidates and compete effectively. We have built our own clinical manufacturing facility and may decide to operate our own manufacturing facility at commercial-scale, or may elect to contract with other third-party contract manufacturers. Our cGMP manufacturing center is currently fully functional, but we may also encounter delays or quality or other issues as we begin to use our manufacturing facility or rely on other third-party contract manufacturers given the complexity of manufacturing cell therapies. We will continue to rely on GC Cell at least partially for manufacturing our product candidates in the near term. Any disruption in the supply of our product candidates could result in delays in our clinical trials, which would materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our partial reliance on third parties for manufacturing increases the risk that supply of our product candidates may become limited or interrupted or may not be of satisfactory quality and quantity.

While we have built our own clinical manufacturing facility, we currently do not operate our manufacturing facilities at commercial-scale and outsource the manufacturing of our product candidates to third parties, including GC Cell, for certain of our product candidates. Moreover, while we are operating our own clinical manufacturing facility and may decide to operate our manufacturing facility at commercial-scale, we currently have limited personnel with experience in commercial drug manufacturing and currently lack the full resources and capabilities to manufacture any of our product candidates on a commercial scale. Our reliance on GC Cell and on a limited number of third-party manufacturers exposes us to the following risks:

We may continue to depend on certain third-party manufacturers and we may be unable to identify alternative manufacturers on acceptable terms or at all because the number of potential manufacturers is limited and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to submit additional information or have questions regarding any replacement contractor. This may require new testing and regulatory interactions. In addition, a new manufacturer would have to be educated in, or develop substantially equivalent processes for, the production of our products.

•

GC Cell or any future third-party manufacturer might be unable to timely formulate and manufacture our product or produce the quantity and quality required to meet our clinical and commercial needs, if any.

•

GC Cell and any other contract manufacturers may not be able to execute our manufacturing procedures appropriately.

•

GC Cell and any future contract manufacturers may not perform as agreed or may not remain in the contract manufacturing business for the time required to supply our clinical trials or to successfully produce, store and distribute our products.

•

Manufacturers are subject to ongoing periodic unannounced inspection by the FDA, the Drug Enforcement Administration, corresponding state agencies and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to monitor and ensure strict compliance with cGMP and other government regulations and corresponding foreign requirements. We have limited control over third-party manufacturers’ compliance with these regulations and standards. Despite our efforts to audit and verify regulatory

compliance, one or more of our third-party manufacturing vendors may be found on regulatory inspection by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to be noncompliant with cGMP regulations.

•

We may not own, or may have to share, the intellectual property rights to any improvements made by our third-party manufacturers in the manufacturing process for our products.

•

GC Cell and any future third-party manufacturers could breach their agreement with us.

Though we have built our own clinical manufacturing facility, we expect that we will continue to rely on third parties for various manufacturing needs.

Manufacturers of pharmaceutical products must comply with strictly enforced cGMP requirements, state and federal regulations, as well as foreign requirements when applicable. Any failure of us or our contract manufacturing organizations to adhere to or document compliance to such regulatory requirements could lead to a delay or interruption in the availability of our program materials for clinical study or enforcement action from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including shutdown of the third-party vendor or invalidation of drug product lots or processes, clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension, variation or withdrawal of approvals, license revocation, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our product candidates, if approved, and significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Our potential future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates may also adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any product candidates that receive regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis.

We are dependent on third parties to acquire, ship and store our cord blood units, NK cell master cell banks and drug product lots, viral vectors, and master and working feeder cell banks, and any disruption, quality concerns, damage or loss would cause delays in replacement and our business could suffer.

Our product candidates and certain other materials generated or used during their production, including cord blood units, viral vectors and working feeder cell banks, are acquired from and shipped by third parties and stored in freezers maintained by us and by third parties. In addition, our master cell banks are stored in freezers maintained by third parties. If there is a disruption to the supply of these materials, if available materials fail to meet quality standards, or if any of these materials are damaged while in transit or while stored at these facilities, including by the loss or malfunction of these freezers or back-up power systems, as well as by damage from fire, power loss or other natural disasters, we would need to establish replacement products, which could adversely impact our clinical supply and delay our clinical trials and preclinical studies. If we are unable to establish replacement materials in a timely fashion, we could incur significant additional expenses and potential liability to our clinical trial patients whose treatment is delayed, and our business could suffer.

Our cell therapy products depend on the availability of reagents and specialized materials and equipment, including cord blood and viral vectors, which in each case are required to be acceptable to the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and such reagents, materials, and equipment may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. We and our third-party manufacturers rely on third-party suppliers for various components, materials and equipment required for the manufacture of our product candidates, some of which are single-source products, and do not have supply arrangements for certain of these components.

Manufacturing of our product candidates, including by GC Cell and certain other of our third-party manufacturers, requires many reagents and other specialty materials and equipment, including cord blood and viral vectors, some of which are sourced from sole suppliers. Reagents and other key materials from these suppliers may have inconsistent attributes and introduce variability into our manufactured product candidates, which may contribute to possible adverse events. We and our third-party manufacturers rely on the general commercial availability of materials required for the manufacture of our product candidates, and do not have supply contracts with many of these suppliers and may not be able to obtain supply contracts with them on acceptable terms or at all. Even if we or our third-party manufacturers are able to enter into such contracts, we may be limited to a sole

third-party for the supply of certain required components. An inability by us or our third-party manufacturers to continue to source product from any of these suppliers, which could be due to regulatory actions or requirements affecting the supplier, adverse financial or other strategic developments experienced by a supplier, labor disputes or shortages, availability of raw materials, unexpected demands, or quality issues, could adversely affect our ability to satisfy demand for our product candidates, which could adversely and materially affect our product sales and operating results or our ability to conduct clinical trials, either of which could significantly harm our business.

If we or our third-party manufacturers are required to change suppliers, or modify the components, equipment, materials or disposables used for the manufacture of our product candidates, we may be required to change our manufacturing operations or clinical trial protocols or to provide additional data to regulatory authorities in order to use any alternative components, equipment, materials or disposables, any of which could set back, delay, or increase the costs required to complete our clinical development and commercialization of our product candidates. Additionally, any such change or modification may adversely affect the safety, efficacy, stability, or potency of our product candidates, and could adversely affect our clinical development of our product candidates and harm our business.

If our third-party suppliers use hazardous, non-hazardous, biological or other materials in a manner that causes injury or violates applicable law, we may be liable for damages.

Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of potentially hazardous substances, including chemical and biological materials. We and our suppliers are subject to federal, state and local laws and regulations in the United States and by foreign governmental authorities governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling and disposal of medical and hazardous materials. Although we believe that we and our suppliers’ procedures for using, handling, storing and disposing of these materials comply with legally prescribed standards, neither we nor our suppliers can completely eliminate the risk of contamination or injury resulting from medical or hazardous materials. As a result of any such contamination or injury, we may incur liability or local, city, state or federal authorities may curtail the use of these materials and interrupt our business operations. In the event of an accident, we could be held liable for damages or penalized with fines, and the liability could exceed our resources. We do not have any insurance for liabilities arising from medical or hazardous materials. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations is expensive, and current or future environmental regulations may impair our research, development and production efforts, which could harm our business, prospects, financial condition or results of operations.

Any contamination or interruption in our manufacturing process, shortages of raw materials or failure of our suppliers to deliver necessary components could result in delays in our clinical development or marketing schedules.

Given the nature of cell therapy manufacturing, there is a risk of contamination. If microbial, viral or other contaminants are discovered in our product candidates or in any of the manufacturing facilities in which products or other materials are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. Any contamination could adversely affect our ability to produce product candidates on schedule and could, therefore, delay our clinical trials, harm our results of operations and cause reputational damage. Some of the raw materials required in our manufacturing process are derived from biologic sources. These raw materials are difficult to procure and may be subject to contamination or recall. A material shortage, contamination, recall or restriction on the use of biologically derived substances in the manufacture of our product candidates could adversely impact or disrupt the commercial manufacturing or the production of clinical material, which could adversely affect our development timelines and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

We face significant competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.

The biopharmaceutical industry in general, and the cell therapy field in particular, is characterized by rapidly advancing and changing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We face

substantial and increasing competition from large and specialty biopharmaceutical companies, as well as public and private medical research institutions and governmental agencies. A large number of cell therapy companies with capabilities and expertise in oncology are advancing development programs in autoimmune diseases. Our known biopharmaceutical competitors that are developing allogeneic CAR-NK or CAR-T cell therapies or T-cell engaging bispecific antibodies include, but may not be limited to, the following: Adicet Bio, Inc., Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., Amgen Inc., Autolus Therapeutics plc, Bristol-Myers Squibb Co, Cabaletta Bio, Inc., Candid Therapeutics, Inc., Caribou Biosciences, Inc., Cartesian Therapeutics, Inc., Century Therapeutics, Inc., Cullinan Therapeutics Inc., Fate Therapeutics, Inc., Galapagos NV, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Gracell Biopharmaceuticals, Inc. (acquired by AstraZeneca), GSK plc, iCell Gene Therapeutics Inc., ImmPACT Bio USA, Inc. (acquired by Lyell Immunopharma, Inc.), ITabMed Co., Ltd., Johnson & Johnson, Kyverna Therapeutics, Inc., Luminary Therapeutics, Inc., Merck & Co., Inc., Nkarta, Inc., Novartis AG, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Roche, Sana Biotechnology, Inc., Sanofi, Shoreline Biosciences Inc., Synthekine Inc., Takeda Pharmaceuticals Company Limited, Wugen, Inc. and Xencor, Inc.

Our competitors will also include companies that are or will be developing other targeted therapies, including small molecule or antibodies for the same indications that we are targeting. It is also possible that new competitors, including those developing similar products or alternatives to cellular immunotherapy product candidates, may emerge and acquire significant market share. Many of our current or potential competitors have significantly greater financial, technical and human resources, as well as more expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical studies and trials and commercializing and marketing approved products. Mergers and acquisitions in the biopharmaceutical industry may result in even greater resource concentration among a smaller number of competitors.

Established pharmaceutical companies may invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make our product candidates less competitive. In addition, any new product that competes with an approved product must demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety in order to overcome price competition and to be commercially successful. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection, discovering, developing, receiving regulatory and marketing approval for or commercializing drugs before we do, which would have an adverse impact on our business and results of operations. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization and have no experience as a company in commercializing products, and we may have to invest significant resources to develop these capabilities. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may not be able to generate product revenue.

We have no internal sales, marketing or distribution capabilities, nor have we commercialized a product. If any of our product candidates ultimately receives regulatory approval, we must build a marketing and sales organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize each such product in major markets, which will be expensive and time consuming, or collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. We have no prior experience as a company in the marketing, sale and distribution of biopharmaceutical products and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. We may not be able to enter into collaborations or hire consultants or external service providers to assist us in sales, marketing and distribution functions on acceptable financial terms, or at all. In addition, our product revenues and our profitability, if any, may be lower if we rely on third parties for these functions than if we were to market, sell and distribute any products that we develop ourselves. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we are not successful in commercializing our products, either on our own or through arrangements with one or more third parties, we may not be able to generate any future product revenue and we would incur significant additional losses.

Coverage and reimbursement may be limited or unavailable in certain market segments for our product candidates, which could make it difficult for us to sell our product candidates, if approved, profitably.

Successful sales of our product candidates, if approved, depend on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors including governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, managed care organizations and commercial payors, among others. Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In addition, because our product candidates represent new approaches to the treatment of autoimmune disease and cancer, we cannot accurately estimate the potential revenue from our product candidates. For products administered under the supervision of a physician, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may also be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such drugs. Patients who are provided medical treatment for their conditions generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their treatment. Obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors is critical to new product acceptance.

Third-party payors decide which drugs and treatments they will cover and the amount of reimbursement. Reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including, but not limited to, the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

•

a covered benefit under its health plan;

•

safe, effective and medically necessary;

•

appropriate for the specific patient;

•

cost-effective; and

•

neither experimental nor investigational.

Obtaining coverage and reimbursement of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to the payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product, if the resulting reimbursement rates are insufficient, hospitals may not approve our product for use in their facility or third-party payors may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients are unlikely to use our product candidates unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our product candidates. Separate reimbursement for the product itself may or may not be available. Instead, the hospital or administering physician may be reimbursed only for providing the treatment or procedure in which our product is used. Further, from time to time, the CMS revises the reimbursement systems used to reimburse healthcare providers, including the Medicare Physician Fee Schedule and Outpatient Prospective Payment System, which may result in reduced Medicare payments. In some cases, private third-party payors rely on all or portions of Medicare payment systems to determine payment rates. Changes to government healthcare programs that reduce payments under these programs may negatively impact payments from private third-party payors, and reduce the willingness of physicians to use our product candidates.

In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Additionally, any companion diagnostic test that we develop will be required to obtain coverage and reimbursement separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement we seek for our product candidates, if approved. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development.

We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in both the United States and in selected foreign jurisdictions. If we obtain approval in one or more foreign jurisdictions for our product candidates, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those jurisdictions. Outside the United States, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies. In some foreign countries, particularly those in Europe, the pricing of biologics is subject to governmental control. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after obtaining marketing approval of a product candidate. The EU provides options for EU Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and

to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment (HTA) of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States. The downward pressure on healthcare costs has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country. Even if a pharmaceutical product obtains a marketing authorization in the EU, there can be no assurance that reimbursement for such product will be secured on a timely basis or at all.

The marketability of any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if government and other third-party payors fail to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement. We expect downward pressure on pharmaceutical pricing to continue. Further, coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit commercialization of any product candidate that we may develop.

The use of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of product liability claims. Product liability claims might be brought against us by consumers, healthcare professionals, pharmaceutical companies or others selling or otherwise coming into contact with our products. On occasion, large judgments have been awarded in class action lawsuits based on products that had unanticipated adverse effects. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. In addition, regardless of merit or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

•

impairment of our business reputation and significant negative media attention;

•

withdrawal of participants from our clinical trials;

•

significant costs to defend the related litigation and related litigation;

•

distraction of management’s attention from our primary business;

•

substantial monetary awards to patients or other claimants;

•

inability to commercialize our product candidates;

•

product recalls, withdrawals or labeling, marketing or promotional restrictions;

•

decreased demand for our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale; and

•

loss of revenue.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

The regulatory approval process of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable, and even if we complete the necessary clinical trials, we cannot predict when, or if, we will obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, and any such regulatory approval may be for a narrower indication than we seek.

The research, testing, manufacturing, labeling, approval, selling, import, export, marketing, and distribution of drug products, including biologics, are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities in and outside the United States. We are not permitted to market any biological drug product in the United States or outside the United States until we receive approval of a BLA from the FDA or similar approvals from comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We have not previously submitted a BLA to the FDA, or similar approval filings to comparable foreign authorities. A BLA and similar applications must include extensive preclinical and clinical data and supporting information to establish the product candidate’s safety and effectiveness for each desired indication. The BLA and similar applications must also include significant information regarding the chemistry, manufacturing and controls for the product, including with respect to chain of identity and chain of custody of the product.

Our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval from the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority for many reasons, including:

•

disagreement with the design or conduct of our clinical trials;

•

failure to demonstrate to the satisfaction of regulatory authorities that our product candidates are safe and effective, or have a positive benefit/risk profile for its proposed indication;

•

failure of clinical trials to meet the level of statistical significance required for approval;

•

disagreement with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•

the insufficiency of data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates to support the submission and filing of a BLA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval;

•

failure to obtain approval of our manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with whom we contract for clinical and commercial supplies or our own manufacturing facility; or

•

changes in the approval policies or regulations that render our preclinical and clinical data insufficient for approval.

This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects. The FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may require more information, including additional preclinical or clinical data to support approval, which may delay or prevent approval and our commercialization plans, or we may decide to abandon the development program. If we were to obtain approval, regulatory authorities may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications than we request (including failing to approve the most commercially promising indications), may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical studies, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of that product candidate. Even if our product candidates meet their safety and efficacy endpoints in clinical trials, the regulatory authorities may not complete their review processes in a timely manner, or we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval.

We expect the novel nature of our product candidates to create further challenges in obtaining regulatory approval. The FDA may also require a panel of experts, referred to as an Advisory Committee, to deliberate on the adequacy of the safety and efficacy data to support licensure. The opinion of the Advisory Committee, although not binding, may have a significant impact on our ability to obtain licensure of the product candidates based on the completed clinical trials, as the FDA often adheres to the Advisory Committee’s recommendations. Similar requirements may apply outside the United States.

Similar requirements apply in the EU. The EMA has a Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT), that is responsible for assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of advanced therapy medicinal products (ATMPs). ATMPs include gene therapy medicinal products, somatic-cell therapy medicinal products and tissue-engineered medicines. The role of the CAT is to prepare a draft opinion on an application for marketing authorization for ATMP candidates that is submitted to the EMA for subsequent review by the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP). In the EU, the development and evaluation of an ATMP must be considered in the context of the relevant EU guidelines. The EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines. Similarly complex regulatory environments exist in other jurisdictions in which we might consider seeking regulatory approvals for our product candidates, further complicating the regulatory landscape.

In addition, we may experience delays or rejections based upon additional government regulation from future legislation or administrative action, or changes in regulatory authority policy during the period of product development, clinical trials and the review process. Accordingly, the regulatory approval pathway for our product candidates may be uncertain, complex, expensive and lengthy, and approval may not be obtained. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation, (CTR), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each EU Member State, leading to a single decision for each EU Member State. The assessment procedure for the authorization of clinical trials has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all EU Member States concerned, and a separate assessment by each EU Member State with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each EU Member State’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the clinical trial approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresaw a three-year transition period that ended on January 31, 2025. Since this date, all new or ongoing trials are subject to the provisions of the CTR.

In addition, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently the subject of proposals for a complete review, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. On April 26, 2023, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new Directive and Regulation to revise the existing pharmaceutical legislation. The proposed revisions remain to be agreed and adopted by the European Council. Moreover, on December 1, 2024, a new European Commission took office. The proposal could, therefore, still be subject to revisions. If adopted in the form proposed, the recent European Commission proposals to revise the existing EU laws governing authorization of medicinal products may result in a number of changes to the regulatory framework governing medicinal products, including a decrease in data and market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the EU and make them open to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than is currently the case with a related reduction in reimbursement status. The proposed revisions remain to be agreed and adopted by the European Parliament and European Council and the proposals may therefore be substantially revised before adoption, the date of which cannot currently be anticipated. The revisions may however have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry and our business in the long term.

Regulatory authorities also may approve a product candidate for more limited indications than requested or they may impose significant limitations in the form of narrow indications, warnings or a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) or comparable foreign strategies. These regulatory authorities may require labeling that includes precautions or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use, or they may grant approval subject to the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials. In addition, regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling claims that are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates and materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The regulatory landscape that will govern our product candidates is uncertain; regulations relating to cell therapy products are still developing, and changes in regulatory requirements could result in delays or discontinuation of development of our product candidates or unexpected costs in obtaining regulatory approval.

Because we are developing novel NK cell therapy product candidates that are unique biological entities, the regulatory requirements that we will be subject to are not entirely clear and may change. Regulatory requirements in the United States and in other countries governing cell therapy products have changed frequently and the FDA or

comparable foreign regulatory authorities may change the requirements, or identify different regulatory pathways, for approval for any of our product candidates. For example, within the FDA, the CBER restructured and created a new Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies to better align its oversight activities with FDA Centers for Drugs and Medical Devices. It is possible that over time new or different divisions may be established or be granted the responsibility for regulating cell therapy products, including NK and CAR-NK cell products such as ours. As a result, we may be required to change our regulatory strategy or to modify our applications for regulatory approval, which could delay and impair our ability to complete the preclinical and clinical development and manufacture of, and obtain regulatory approval for, our product candidates.

In addition to FDA oversight and oversight by IRBs under guidelines promulgated by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) gene therapy clinical trials are also subject to review and oversight by an institutional biosafety committee (IBC) a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. Before a clinical study can begin at any institution, that institution’s IRB, and its IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment. While the NIH guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH guidelines voluntarily follow them. Moreover, serious adverse events or developments in clinical trials of cell therapy product candidates conducted by others may cause the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to initiate a clinical hold on our clinical trials or otherwise change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates. Although the FDA decides whether individual gene therapy protocols may proceed, the review process and determinations of other reviewing bodies can impede or delay the initiation of a clinical trial, even if the FDA has reviewed the trial and approved its initiation. Changes in regulatory authorities and advisory groups, or any new requirements or guidelines they promulgate, may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development and manufacturing costs, lead to changes in regulatory pathways, positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. In addition, adverse developments in clinical trials of cell therapy products conducted by others may cause the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to change the requirements for approval of any of our product candidates.

These various regulatory review committees and advisory groups and new or revised guidelines that they promulgate from time to time may lengthen the regulatory review process, require us to perform additional studies, increase our development costs, lead to changes in regulatory positions and interpretations, delay or prevent approval and commercialization of our product candidates or lead to significant post-approval limitations or restrictions. Even if our product candidates obtain required regulatory approvals, such approvals may later be withdrawn as a result of changes in regulations or the interpretation of regulations by applicable regulatory authorities.

Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product to market could decrease our ability to operate our business as planned and to generate sufficient product revenue to maintain our business.

The FDA, the EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from trials conducted in locations outside of their jurisdiction.

We may choose to conduct international clinical trials in the future. The acceptance of study data by the FDA, the EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority from clinical trials conducted outside of their respective jurisdictions may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the United States population and United States medical practice; (ii) the trials are performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to current GCP requirements; and (iii) the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate mean. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including the adequacy of the patient population studied and statistical powering, must be met. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA, the EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of its

applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA, the EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and delay aspects of our business plan, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

We may seek orphan drug designation for some or all of our product candidates across various indications, but we may be unable to obtain such designations or to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including market exclusivity, which may cause our revenue, if any, to be reduced.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the United States will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug or biologic. In order to obtain orphan drug designation, the request must be made before submitting a BLA. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages, and user-fee waivers. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. In the EU a medicinal product may be designated as orphan if (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify investment; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. The application for orphan designation must be submitted before the application for marketing authorization.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval of that particular product for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a BLA, to market the same drug (including biologic) for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. As a result, even if one of our product candidates receives orphan exclusivity, the FDA can still approve other biologics that do not have the same principal molecular structural features for use in treating the same indication or disease or the same biologic for a different indication or disease during the exclusivity period. Furthermore, the FDA can waive orphan exclusivity if we are unable to manufacture sufficient supply of our product or if a subsequent applicant demonstrates clinical superiority over our product.

In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees, fee waivers, protocol assistance and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Moreover, upon grant of a marketing authorization and assuming the requirement for orphan designation are also met at the time the marketing authorization is granted, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. The period of exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed Pediatric Investigation Plan. However, during such period, marketing authorizations may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication if: (i) the applicant can establish that the second medicinal product, although similar to the orphan medicinal product already authorized is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the orphan medicinal product already authorized; (ii) the marketing authorization holder for the orphan medicinal product grants its consent; or (iii) if the marketing authorization holder of the orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities of product. The EU exclusivity period can be reduced to six years, if, at the end of the fifth year a medicinal product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation (i.e., the prevalence of the condition has increased above the orphan designation threshold or it is judged that the product is sufficiently profitable so as not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity).

We have received orphan drug designation for AB-201 in the United States, for the treatment of gastric and gastroesophageal junction cancer. Additionally, we may seek orphan drug designation for some or all of our product candidates in specific orphan indications in which there is a medically plausible basis for the use of these products. Even if we obtain orphan drug designation, exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan designated indication and may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition, or if a subsequent applicant demonstrates clinical superiority over our products, if approved. Similar considerations may apply outside the United States. In addition, although we may seek orphan drug designation for other product candidates, we may never receive such designations In addition, orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA or European Commission from approving competing drugs for the same or similar indication containing a different active ingredient. In addition, if a subsequent drug is approved for marketing for the same or a similar indication as any of our product candidates that receive marketing approval, we may face increased competition and lose market share regardless of orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

We may seek special designations by the regulatory authorities to expedite regulatory approvals, but may not be successful in receiving these designations, and even if received, they may not benefit the development and regulatory approval process.

We may seek various designations by regulatory authorities, such as Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy Designation (RMAT) Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Fast Track Designation, or PRIority MEdicine (PRIME) Designation from regulatory authorities, for any product candidate that we develop. A product candidate may receive RMAT designation from the FDA if it is a regenerative medicine therapy that is intended to treat, modify, reverse or cure a serious or life-threatening condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate has the potential to address an unmet medical need for such condition. RMAT designation provides potential benefits that include more frequent meetings with FDA to discuss the development plan for the product candidate, and potential eligibility for rolling review and priority review. Products granted RMAT designation may also be eligible for accelerated approval on the basis of a surrogate or intermediate endpoint reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit, or reliance upon data obtained from a meaningful number of sites, including through expansion to additional sites post-approval, if appropriate. RMAT-designated products that receive accelerated approval may, as appropriate, fulfill their post-approval requirements through the submission of clinical evidence, clinical studies, patient registries, or other sources of real world evidence (such as electronic health records); through the collection of larger confirmatory data sets; or via post-approval monitoring of all patients treated with such therapy prior to approval of the therapy.

A Breakthrough Therapy is defined by the FDA as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For product candidates that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the study can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens.

If a drug is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition or disease, and nonclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need, the product may qualify for Fast Track Designation, for which sponsors must apply. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation. If granted, fast track designation makes a drug eligible for more frequent interactions with FDA to discuss the development plan and clinical trial design, as well as rolling review of the application, which means that the company can submit completed sections of its marketing application for review prior to completion of the entire submission. Products with Fast Track designation may also be eligible for accelerated approval and priority review, if the relevant criteria are met.

Innovative products that target an unmet medical need and are expected to be of major public health interest may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the PRIME scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed

at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicinal products that target unmet medical needs. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the EU or, if there is, the new medicinal product will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods of therapy or improving existing ones. Benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and potentially accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted.

Seeking and obtaining these designations is dependent upon results of our clinical program, and we cannot guarantee whether and when we may have the data from our clinical programs to support an application to obtain any such designation. The FDA and the EMA, as applicable, have broad discretion whether or not to grant any of these designations, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for one or more of these designations, the applicable regulatory authority may determine not to grant it. We received Fast Track designation for AlloNK in combination with either rituximab or obinutuzumab to improve disease activity in patients with class III or class IV LN in February 2024. We also received Fast Track designation for AlloNK for IV infusion in combination with rituximab for the treatment of relapsed or refractory B-NHL origin to improve cancer response rates in January 2023. Fast Track designation does not guarantee an accelerated review of AlloNK or increase the likelihood that AlloNK will receive regulatory approval by the FDA. Even if we do receive the designations we may apply for, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA or EMA procedures, as applicable. The FDA or EU, as applicable, may rescind any granted designations if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Additionally, qualification for any expedited review procedure does not ensure that we will ultimately obtain regulatory approval for such product candidate.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, comparable foreign regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials as clinical studies conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval.

We may also submit marketing applications in other countries. Regulatory authorities in jurisdictions outside of the United States have requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those jurisdictions. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and/or receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates will require surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The FDA may also require a REMS in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional

elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves our product candidates, the manufacturing processes, the availability of our product candidates to be administered in rheumatology community centers, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import, export and recordkeeping for our product candidates will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements.

These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any BLA, other marketing application and previous responses to inspectional observations. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control. In addition, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could require us to conduct another study to obtain additional safety or biomarker information.

Further, we will be required to comply with FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ promotion and advertising rules, which include, among others, standards for direct-to-consumer advertising, restrictions on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved uses (known as “off-label use”), limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and requirements for promotional activities involving the internet and social media. Although the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not regulate a physician’s choice of drug treatment made in the physician’s independent medical judgment, they do restrict promotional communications from companies or their sales force with respect to off-label uses of products for which marketing clearance has not been issued. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with our product candidates, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party suppliers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS or similar foreign program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

•

restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of our product candidates, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;

•

fines, untitled letters, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;

•

refusal by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications submitted by us or suspension or revocation of license approvals;

•

ARTV US Equity

ARTV · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors

ARTV US Equity☆

ARTV · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors

ARTV US Equity