Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Our business faces significant risks and uncertainties. The occurrence of any of these risks could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and those we may make from time to time. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial may also adversely affect our business.

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history on which to assess our business; we have not completed any clinical trials, have no products approved for commercial sale, have historically incurred losses, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. Moreover, we have never generated revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. We will need to raise substantial additional capital to continue to fund our operations in the future. We have based our estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and could exhaust our available financial resources sooner than we currently anticipate. We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our product candidates, organizing and staffing our company, and providing general and administrative support for our operations.

Developing our product candidates requires a substantial amount of capital. We expect our research and development expenses to continue to increase in connection with its ongoing activities, particularly as we advance our product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials. We will need to raise additional capital to fund our operations, and such funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all, and such funding may become even more difficult to obtain due to rising interest rates and the current downturn in the U.S. capital markets and the biotechnology sector in general. Competition for additional capital among biotechnology companies may be particularly intense during economic downturns. We may be unable to raise capital through public offerings of our ordinary shares and may need to turn to alternative financing arrangements. Such arrangements, if we pursue them, could involve the issuance of one or more types of securities, including ordinary shares, preferred shares, convertible debt, warrants to acquire ordinary shares, or other securities. These securities could be issued at or below the then prevailing market price for our ordinary shares. In addition, if we issue debt securities, the holders of the debt would have a claim to our assets that would be superior to the rights of shareholders until the principal, accrued and unpaid interest, and any premium or make-whole has been paid. Interest on any newly-issued debt securities and/or newly-incurred borrowings would increase our operating costs and reduce our net income (or increase our net loss), and these impacts may be material. If the issuance of new securities results in diminished rights to holders of our ordinary shares, the market price of our ordinary shares could be materially and adversely affected.

We do not currently have any products approved for sale and do not generate any revenue from product sales. Accordingly, we expect to rely primarily on equity and/or debt financings to fund our continued operations. Our ability to raise additional funds will depend, in part, on the success of our preclinical studies and clinical trials and other product development activities, regulatory events, our ability to identify and enter into licensing or other strategic arrangements, and other events or conditions that may affect our value or prospects, as well as factors related to financial, economic, and market conditions, many of which are beyond our control. There can be no assurances that sufficient funds will be available to us when required or on acceptable terms, if at all.

If we are unable to raise additional capital when required or on acceptable terms, we may be required to:

•significantly delay, scale back, or discontinue the development or commercialization of our product candidates;

•seek strategic partnerships, or amend existing partnerships, for research and development programs at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or that we otherwise would have sought to develop independently, or on terms that are less favorable than might otherwise be available in the future;

•dispose of technology assets, or relinquish or license on unfavorable terms, our rights to technologies or any of our product candidates that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves;

•pursue the sale of the company to a third party at a price that may result in a loss on investment for our shareholders; or

•file for bankruptcy or cease operations altogether (and face any related legal proceedings).

Table of Contents

Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results, and prospects.

Even if successful in raising new capital, we could be limited in the amount of capital we raise due to investor demand restrictions placed on the amount of capital we raise or other reasons.

Additionally, any capital raising efforts are subject to significant risks and contingencies, as described in more detail under the risk factor titled “Raising additional capital may cause dilution to ourshareholders, restrict ouroperations, or require us to relinquish rights.”

We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaborators, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize, one or more of our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales depends heavily on our success in many areas, including but not limited to:

•completing research and development of our product candidates;

•obtaining regulatory approvals for our product candidates for which we complete clinical trials;

•manufacturing product candidates and establishing and maintaining supply and manufacturing relationships with third parties that are commercially feasible, meet regulatory requirements and our supply needs in sufficient quantities to meet market demand for our product candidates, if approved;

•qualifying for adequate coverage and reimbursement by government and third-party payors for any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval;

•marketing, launching, and commercializing product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval, either directly or with a collaborator or distributor;

•gaining market acceptance of our product candidates as treatment options;

•addressing any competing products and technological and market developments;

•implementing internal systems and infrastructure, as needed;

•protecting and enforcing our intellectual property rights, including patents, trade secrets, and know-how;

•negotiating favorable terms in any collaboration, licensing, or other arrangements into which we may enter in the future;

•obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors and maintaining pricing for our product candidates that supports profitability; and

•attracting, hiring, and retaining qualified personnel.

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by regulatory authorities to perform clinical and other studies in addition to those that we anticipate. Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of any approved products, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations. We will also have to develop or acquire manufacturing capabilities or continue to contract with contract manufacturers in order to continue development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. For instance, if the costs of manufacturing our drug product are not commercially feasible, we will need to develop or procure our drug product in a commercially feasible manner in order to successfully commercialize a future approved product, if any. Additionally, if we are not able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may never become profitable.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history on which to assess our business; we have not completed any clinical trials, have no products approved for commercial sale, have historically incurred losses, and anticipates that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

Table of Contents

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Since September 19, 2024 (inception), we have incurred significant operating losses. For the twelve months ended December 31, 2025, we reported a net loss of $153.9 million and had an accumulated deficit of $171.8. We will need to raise substantial additional capital to continue to fund our operations in the future. Failure to raise capital as and when needed, on favorable terms or at all, would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our product candidates. Changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster or slower than we currently anticipate. If we are unable to acquire additional capital or resources, we will be required to modify our operational plans to complete future milestones and we may be required to delay, limit, reduce, or eliminate development or future commercialization efforts of product candidates and/or programs. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available financial resources sooner than we currently anticipate. We may be forced to reduce our operating expenses and raise additional funds to meet our working capital needs, principally through the additional sales of our securities or debt financings or entering into strategic collaborations.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our product candidates, organizing and staffing our company, and providing general and administrative support for our operations. To date, we have funded our operations primarily from the sale and issuance of convertible preferred and common equity securities and unsecured convertible notes. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of our future expenditures and our ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations, or grants.

Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We expect our losses to increase as our product candidates enter more advanced clinical trials. It may be several years, if ever, before we complete pivotal clinical trials and/or have a product candidate approved for commercialization. We expect to invest significant funds into the research and development of our current programs to determine the potential to advance product candidates to regulatory approval. If we obtain regulatory approval to market a product candidate, our future revenue will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates may receive approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, pricing, coverage, and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, and adequate market share for our product candidates in those markets. Even if we obtain adequate market share for our product candidates, because the potential markets in which our product candidates may ultimately receive regulatory approval could be very small, we may never become profitable despite obtaining such market share and acceptance of our products.

We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and increasing operating losses for the foreseeable future and our expenses will increase substantially if and as we:

•continue the preclinical development and initiate the clinical development of our product candidates;

•continue efforts to discover and develop new product candidates;

•continue the manufacturing of our product candidates or increase volumes manufactured by third parties;

•advance our product candidates into larger, more expensive clinical trials;

•initiate additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates;

•seek regulatory approvals and reimbursement for our product candidates;

•establish a sales, marketing, and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval and market for ourselves;

•seek to identify, assess, acquire, and/or develop other product candidates;

•make milestone, royalty, or other payments under third-party license agreements;

•seek to maintain, protect, and expand our intellectual property portfolio;

•are required to pay penalties under our Registration Rights Agreement for failing to timely register the applicable securities;

•seek to attract and retain skilled personnel;

•experience any delays or encounter issues with the development and potential regulatory approval of our clinical and product candidates such as safety issues, manufacturing delays, clinical trial accrual delays, longer follow-up

Table of Contents

for planned studies or trials, additional major studies or trials, or supportive trials necessary to support regulatory approval; and

•incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company.

We have no significant experience as a company in initiating, conducting, or completing clinical trials. In part because of this lack of experience, we cannot be certain that our planned clinical trials will begin or be completed on time, if at all. In addition, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales, marketing, and distribution activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history. Further, the net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our shareholders, restrict our operations, or require us to relinquish rights.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenue from the sale of our product candidates, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, and license and development agreements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity securities or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our shareholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of holders of our ordinary shares. 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 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 or other arrangements with third parties when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce, or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to third parties to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity, including pursuant to any sales under convertible debt or other securities convertible into equity, the ownership interest of our shareholders will be diluted, and the terms of these new securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our shareholders. For instance, immediately prior to the consummation of the Merger, certain institutional and accredited investors purchased shares of Pre-Merger Crescent common stock and pre-funded warrants for an aggregate purchase price of $200.0 million (which includes $37.5 million of gross proceeds we previously received from the issuance of the Convertible Notes in October 2024). Additionally, in December 2025, certain investors agreed to purchase ordinary shares of Crescent and pre-funded warrants for an aggregate purchase price of $185.0 million.

Debt financing, if available, would likely involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, making additional product acquisitions, or declaring dividends. If we raise additional funds through strategic collaborations or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or future revenue streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. We cannot assure that we will be able to obtain additional funding if and when necessary to fund our entire portfolio of product candidates to meet our projected plans. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to delay or discontinue one or more of our development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on potential business opportunities, which could materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

Risks Related to Discovery, Development, and Commercialization

We face competition from entities that have developed or may develop programs for the diseases addressed by product candidates developed by us.

The development and commercialization of drugs is highly competitive. Product candidates developed by us, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to effectively compete may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration. We compete with a variety of multinational biopharmaceutical companies, specialized biotechnology companies and emerging biotechnology companies, including Merck, Bristol Myers Squibb, Genentech, AstraZeneca, Summit Therapeutics Inc., BioNTech SE, LaNova Medicines Ltd., and Compass Therapeutics, Inc., as well

Table of Contents

as academic institutions, governmental agencies, and public and private research institutions, among others. Many of the companies with which we are currently competing or will compete against in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing regulatory approved products than we do, and are further along in the clinical development and/or commercialization process than we are. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites, raising capital, registering patients for clinical trials, establishing and defending rights to intellectual property, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product candidates.

Our competitors have developed, are developing, or may in the future develop programs and processes competitive with our programs and processes. Competitive therapeutic treatments include those that have already been approved and accepted by the medical community and any potential new treatments, including those currently under clinical development. Our success will depend partially on our ability to develop and commercialize products that have a competitive safety, efficacy, dosing, and/or presentation profile. Our commercial opportunity and success will be reduced or eliminated if competing products are safer, more effective, have a more attractive dosing profile or presentation or are less expensive than the products we develop, or if our competitors develop competing products or if biosimilars enter the market more quickly than we do and are able to gain market acceptance. Conversely, the lack of commercial success of other competing programs may raise concerns about the financial viability of our programs.

We are substantially dependent on the success of our lead program, CR-001, as well as our ADC programs, CR-002 and CR-003, and our development programs may not be successful.

Our future success is substantially dependent on our ability to timely obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize, our lead program, CR-001. We also intend to advance our ADC programs, CR-002 and CR-003. We are investing a majority of our efforts and financial resources into the research and development of these programs. We believe the success of CR-001 is dependent on observing in CR-001 the targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics of ivonescimab, an anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody that demonstrated significantly improved progression-free survival (“PFS”) to market-leading pembrolizumab in a large third-party Phase 3 clinical trial, while avoiding the mechanistic risks that could perturb the balance of efficacy and safety that define this new class of immunotherapy. To the extent we do not observe the above-noted targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics in CR-001, or are otherwise unsuccessful in our efforts to develop CR-001, it would significantly and adversely affect the clinical and commercial potential of CR-001.

Our product candidates will require additional clinical development, evaluation of clinical, preclinical, and manufacturing activities, product development, regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, substantial investment, and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval.

The success of our product candidates will depend on a variety of factors. We do not have complete control over many of these factors, including certain aspects of clinical development and the regulatory submission process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights, and the manufacturing, marketing, distribution, and sales efforts of any current or future collaborator. Accordingly, we cannot assure you that we will ever be able to generate revenue through the sale of these product candidates, even if approved. If we are not successful in obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing our CR-001, CR-002, CR-003 and any future programs, including CR-004, or are significantly delayed in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the time frames we announce and expect, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed and our expenses may increase and, as a result, our share price may decline.

From time to time, we estimate the timing of the anticipated accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory, and other product development goals, which we sometimes refer to as milestones. These milestones may include the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials, such as the expected timing for the anticipated commencement of our Phase 1/2 studies, and clinical trials in solid tumor and other target indications, as well as the receipt of clinical data, and submission of regulatory filings. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones. All of these milestones are and will be based on numerous assumptions. The actual timing of

Table of Contents

these milestones can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. If we do not meet these milestones as publicly announced, or at all, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed or never achieved and, as a result, our share price may decline. Additionally, delays relative to our projected timelines are likely to cause overall expenses to increase, which may require us to raise additional capital sooner than expected and prior to achieving targeted development milestones.

Any drug delivery device that we potentially use to deliver our product candidates may have its own regulatory, development, supply and other risks.

We expect to deliver our product candidates via a drug delivery device, such as an injector or other delivery system. There may be unforeseen technical complications related to the development activities required to bring such a product to market, including primary container compatibility and/or dose volume requirements. Our product candidates may not be approved or may be substantially delayed in receiving approval if the devices that we choose to develop do not gain and/or maintain their own regulatory approvals or clearances. Where approval of the drug product and device is sought under a single application, the increased complexity of the review process may delay approval. For example, the FDA’s review of a marketing application for our product candidates may include the participation of both the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research and the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. Although the FDA and comparable foreign agencies have or may have systems in place for the review and approval of combination products, we may experience additional delays in the development and commercialization of such product candidates due to regulatory timing constraints and uncertainties in the product development and approval process. Moreover, although we anticipate that the device component of any combination product candidates we develop will be reviewed within the usual time frames expected for the underlying biologic component application, and that no separate marketing application for the device components of such product candidates will be required in the United States, the FDA or comparable regulatory authorities may delay approval or require us to conduct additional studies with the device which may delay the approval of the combination product.

In addition, some drug delivery devices are provided by single-source unaffiliated third-party companies. We may be dependent on the sustained cooperation and effort of those third-party companies both to supply the devices and, in some cases, to conduct the studies required for approval or other regulatory clearance of the devices. Even if approval is obtained, we may also be dependent on those third-party companies continuing to maintain such approvals or clearances once they have been received. Failure of third-party companies to supply the devices, to successfully complete studies on the devices in a timely manner, or to obtain or maintain required approvals or clearances of the devices could result in increased development costs, delays in or failure to obtain regulatory approval, and delays in product candidates reaching the market or in gaining approval or clearance for expanded labels for new indications.

Our approach to the discovery and development of our programs is unproven, and we may not be successful in our efforts to build a pipeline of programs with commercial value.

Our approach to the discovery and development of our programs, particularly CR-001, leverages clinically validated mechanisms of action and incorporates the targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics of ivonescimab, an anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody that demonstrated significantly improved PFS to market-leading pembrolizumab in HARMONi-2, a large Phase 3 clinical trial, sponsored by Akeso, for the treatment of naïve, or not previously treated, advanced and metastatic non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”). Our programs are purposefully designed to avoid mechanistic risks that could perturb the balance of efficacy and safety that defines this new class of immunotherapy. However, the scientific research that forms the basis of our efforts to develop programs using ivonescimab-like technologies is ongoing and may not result in viable programs. There are limited clinical data available on product candidates utilizing the same mechanism of action as ivonescimab, especially in solid tumor indications, demonstrating whether they are safe or effective for long-term treatment in humans. The long-term safety and efficacy of these technologies and exposure profile of our programs compared to currently approved products is unknown. Additionally, there can be no assurance that our ongoing and planned clinical trials will generate results compared to those observed for ivonescimab, particularly where we conduct trials outside of NSCLC.

We may ultimately discover that reproducing ivonescimab’s established pharmacology for its specific targets and indications and any programs resulting therefrom does not possess certain properties required for therapeutic effectiveness. We currently have only preclinical data regarding the ivonescimab-like properties of our programs and the same results may not be seen in humans. In addition, programs using ivonescimab-like technologies may demonstrate different chemical and pharmacological properties in patients than they do in laboratory studies. This technology and any programs resulting therefrom may not demonstrate the same chemical and pharmacological properties in humans and may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective, or harmful ways. Many product candidates that appeared highly promising in preclinical studies or in early-stage clinical trials have failed when advanced into, or further in, clinical development. In

Table of Contents

addition, the failure of companies that are developing products similar to us or targeting the same indications as we are to demonstrate safety and efficacy of their product candidates may be harmful to our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

In addition, we may in the future seek to discover and develop programs that are based on novel targets and technologies that are unproven. If our discovery or business development activities fail to identify novel targets or technologies for drug development, or such targets prove to be unsuitable for treating human disease, we may not be able to develop viable additional programs. We and our existing or future collaborators may never receive approval to market and commercialize any product candidate. Even if we or an existing or future collaborator obtains regulatory approval, the approval may be for targets, disease indications, or patient populations that are not as broad as we intended or desired or may require labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings. If the products resulting from our programs prove to be ineffective, unsafe, or commercially unviable, such programs would have little, if any, value, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process that is subject to delays and uncertain outcomes, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results. If our preclinical studies and clinical trials are not sufficient to support regulatory approval of any of our product candidates, we may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development of such product candidate.

Before obtaining approval from regulatory authorities for the commercialization of any of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety purity, potency, and efficacy of the product candidate in humans. Before we can initiate clinical trials for any product candidates, we must submit the results of preclinical studies to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities along with other information, including information about product candidate chemistry, manufacturing and controls and our proposed clinical trial protocol, as part of an Investigational New Drug application (“IND”) or similar regulatory submission. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to conduct additional preclinical studies for any product candidate before it allows us to initiate clinical trials under any IND or similar regulatory submission, which may lead to delays and increase the costs of our preclinical development programs. Moreover, even if we commence clinical trials, issues may arise that could cause regulatory authorities to suspend or terminate such clinical trials. Any such delays in the commencement or completion of our ongoing and planned clinical trials for our product candidates could significantly affect our product development timelines and product development costs and harm our financial position.

We do not know whether our planned preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. The timing for commencement, data readouts and completion of clinical trials can be delayed for a number of reasons, including delays related to:

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

•obtaining allowance or approval from regulatory authorities to commence a trial or reaching a consensus with regulatory authorities on trial design;

•the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities disagreeing as to the design or implementation of our clinical trials;

•any failure or delay in reaching an agreement with Contract Research Organizations (“CROs”) and clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;

•delays in identifying, recruiting and training suitable clinical investigators;

•obtaining approval from one or more institutional review boards, or IRBs, or ethics committees at clinical trial sites;

•IRBs refusing to approve, suspending or terminating the trial at an investigational site, precluding enrollment of additional subjects, or withdrawing their approval of the trial;

•changes or amendments to the clinical trial protocol;

Table of Contents

•clinical sites deviating from the trial protocol or dropping out of a trial;

•failure by our CROs to perform in accordance with Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”) requirements or applicable regulatory rules and guidelines in other countries;

•manufacturing sufficient quantities of our product candidates, or obtaining sufficient quantities of combination therapies for use in clinical trials;

•subjects failing to enroll or remain in our trials at the rate we expect, or failing to return for post-treatment follow-up, including subjects failing to remain in our trials;

•patients choosing an alternative product for the indications for which we are developing our product candidates, or participating in competing clinical trials;

•lack of adequate funding to continue a clinical trial, or costs being greater than we anticipate;

•subjects experiencing severe or serious unexpected drug-related adverse effects;

•occurrence of serious adverse events in trials of the same class of agents conducted by other companies that could be considered similar to our product candidates;

•selection of clinical endpoints that require prolonged periods of clinical observation or extended analysis of the resulting data;

•transfer of manufacturing processes to larger-scale facilities operated by a contract manufacturing organization (“CMO”), delays or failure by our CMOs or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process, or failure of our CMOs to produce clinical trial materials in accordance with current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”) or similar foreign requirements, regulations or other applicable requirements; and

•third parties being unwilling or unable to satisfy their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner.

Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with the FDA and other applicable regulatory authorities’ legal requirements, regulations and guidelines, and remain subject to oversight by these governmental agencies and ethics committees or Institutional Review Boards (“IRBs”) at the medical institutions where such clinical trials are conducted. We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by a Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial or by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Such 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 applicable clinical trial protocols, adverse findings from inspections of clinical trial sites by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. In addition, changes in regulatory requirements and policies may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to comply with these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to regulators or to IRBs for reexamination, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial.

Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries, as we may do for our future product candidates, presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled subjects in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocols as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, and political and economic risks, including war, relevant to such foreign countries.

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 interpretation of the study. 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, 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 regulatory approval of one or more of our product candidates.

Table of Contents

In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, the termination suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. Any resulting delays to our clinical trials could shorten any period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates. In such cases, our competitors may be able to bring products to market before we do, and the commercial viability of our product candidates could be significantly reduced. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the European Union (“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. While the EU Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application (“CTA”), to be submitted in each EU member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR transition period ended on January 31, 2025, and all clinical trials (and related applications) are now fully subject to the provisions of the CTR. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us and our third-party service providers, such as CROs, may impact our developments plans.

If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our future clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

Patient enrollment is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials, and the timing of our clinical trials will depend, in part, on the speed at which we can recruit patients to participate in our trials, as well as completion of required follow-up periods. 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 trial’s conclusion as required by the FDA or other comparable regulatory authorities.

Patient enrollment in clinical trials may be affected by other factors, including:

•size and nature of the targeted patient population;

•severity of the disease or condition under investigation;

•availability and efficacy of approved therapies for the disease or condition under investigation;

•patient eligibility criteria for the trial in question as defined in the protocol;

•perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study;

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

•efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;

•patient referral practices of physicians;

•the ability to monitor patients adequately during and after treatment;

•proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for prospective patients;

•continued enrollment of prospective patients by clinical trial sites; and

•the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of such trials before completion.

Additionally, other pharmaceutical companies targeting these same diseases are recruiting clinical trial patients from these patient populations, which may make it more difficult to fully enroll any clinical trials. We also rely on, and will

Table of Contents

continue to rely on, CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure proper and timely conduct of our clinical trials and preclinical studies. Though we have entered into agreements governing their services, we will have limited influence over their actual performance. Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to obtain regulatory approval for the sale of our product candidates. Furthermore, even if we are able to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining enrollment of such patients in our clinical trials.

Preliminary, “topline”, or interim data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures.

From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations, and conclusions as part of our analyses of these data without the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate complete data. As a result, the preliminary or topline 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 or subsequently made subject to audit and verification procedures. As a result, any preliminary or topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Interim data 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 or as patients from our clinical trials continue other treatments. Further, disclosure of such data by us could result in volatility in the price of our ordinary shares.

Further, others, including regulatory agencies, 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 product candidate, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate and us in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. As a result, you or others may have reached different conclusions based on such extensive information in comparison to our publicly disclosed conclusion regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial. If the preliminary, topline, or interim data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including 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.

Use of our product candidates could be associated with adverse side effects, adverse events or other properties or safety risks, which could delay or preclude approval, cause us to suspend or discontinue clinical trials, abandon a product candidate, limit the commercial profile of an approved product or result in other significant negative consequences that could severely harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition.

Results of our clinical trials could reveal a high and unacceptable severity and prevalence of side effects or unexpected characteristics. Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates, whether used alone on in combination with other therapies, could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials or lead to the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or, if such product candidates are approved, result in a more restrictive label and other post-approval requirements. Any treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete the trial, or could result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

If our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects or have unexpected characteristics in preclinical studies or clinical trials, when used alone or in combination with other approved products or investigational drugs, we may need to interrupt, delay or abandon their development or limit development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective.

Patients in our ongoing and planned clinical trials may in the future suffer significant adverse events or other side effects not observed in our preclinical studies or previous clinical trials. Patients treated with our product candidates may also be undergoing surgical, radiation or chemotherapy treatments, which can cause side effects or adverse events that are unrelated to our product candidate, but may still impact the success of our clinical trials. The inclusion of critically ill patients in our clinical trials may result in deaths or other adverse medical events due to other therapies or medications that

Table of Contents

such patients may be using or due to the gravity of such patients’ illnesses. If such significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of our ongoing or planned clinical trials, we may have difficulty recruiting patients to the clinical trials, or we may be required to abandon the trials or our development efforts of that product candidate altogether. We, the FDA, other comparable regulatory authorities or an IRB may suspend clinical trials of a product candidate at any time for various reasons, including a belief that subjects in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance due to tolerability concerns as compared to other available therapies. Any of these developments could materially harm our business, financial condition and prospects.

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receives regulatory approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result. For example, the FDA could require us to adopt a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”), to ensure that the benefits of treatment with such product candidate outweigh the risks for each potential patient, which may include, among other things, a communication plan to health care practitioners, patient education, extensive patient monitoring or distribution systems and processes that are highly controlled, restrictive and more costly than what is typical for the industry. We or our collaborators may also be required to adopt a REMS or engage in similar actions, such as patient education, certification of health care professionals or specific monitoring, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by any product that we develop alone. Other potentially significant negative consequences associated with adverse events include:

•we may be required to suspend marketing of a product, or we may decide to remove such product from the marketplace;

•regulatory authorities may withdraw or change their approvals of a product;

•regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label or limit access of a product to selective specialized centers with additional safety reporting and with requirements that patients be geographically close to these centers for all or part of their treatment;

•we may be required to create a medication guide outlining the risks of a product for patients, or to conduct post-marketing studies;

•we may be required to change the way a product is administered;

•we could be subject to fines, injunctions, or the imposition of criminal or civil penalties, or be sued and held liable for harm caused to subjects or patients; and

•a product may become less competitive, and our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could diminish the usage or otherwise limit the commercial success of our product candidates and prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved by the FDA or other regulatory authorities.

We may attempt to obtain accelerated approval of our product candidates. If we are unable to obtain accelerated approval, we may be required to conduct clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, or the size and duration of our pivotal clinical trials could be greater than currently planned, which could increase the expense of obtaining, reduce the likelihood of obtaining, and/or delay the timing of obtaining necessary regulatory approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require that we conduct confirmatory trials to verify clinical benefit. If such confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-approval requirements, the FDA may seek to withdraw any accelerated approval we have obtained.

We may seek accelerated approval for our product candidates. The FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic advantage over available therapies and upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit, but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease.

Table of Contents

If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, the FDA may require, as appropriate, that any such confirmatory study be initiated or substantially underway prior to the submission of an application for accelerated approval. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefits relative to its risks, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug on an expedited basis.

If we choose to pursue accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree that we have identified appropriate surrogate or intermediate endpoints. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent FDA feedback that we will continue to pursue accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review, or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we submit an application for accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that such application will be accepted or that approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA also could require us to conduct further studies or trials prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type.

Even if we receive accelerated approval of any of our product candidates from the FDA, we will be subject to rigorous post-approval requirements, including submission to the FDA of all promotional materials prior to their dissemination, and will likely be required by FDA to conduct a confirmatory study to verify the predicted clinical benefit. The FDA could withdraw accelerated approval for multiple reasons, including our failure to conduct any required post-approval study with due diligence, or the inability of such study to confirm the predicted clinical benefit. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited review or approval for a product candidate could result in a longer time period prior to commercializing such product candidate, if ever, increase the cost of development of such product candidate, and harm our competitive position in the marketplace.

We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular program and fail to capitalize on programs that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus our research and development efforts on certain selected programs. We have and may continue to utilize Paragon Therapeutics, Inc. (“Paragon”) to conduct certain research activities (primarily preclinical studies) pursuant to discovery and option agreements into which we may enter, such as the Antibody Discovery and Option Agreement, dated September 19, 2024 (the “Antibody Paragon Option Agreement”), by and among Crescent, Paragon, and Parascent Holding LLC. We previously entered into the Amended and Restated ADC Discovery and Option Agreement, dated April 28, 2025 (the “ADC Paragon Option Agreement” and together with the Antibody Paragon Option Agreement, the “Paragon Option Agreements”), by and among Crescent, Paragon and Parascent Holding LLC, and we incurred certain obligations with respect to this agreement. On February 24, 2026, we provided notice to Paragon of our intention to terminate the ADC Paragon Option Agreement and we anticipate that it will be terminated as of March 26, 2026 and we will no longer license intellectual property rights with respect to Former CR-003 following the Option Agreement Termination.

For example, we are initially focused on our lead programs, CR-001, CR-002 and CR-003. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other programs such as CR-004 that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable product candidates. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing, or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. In addition, historically we have selected product candidates amongst a variety of potential product candidates from Paragon, and the product candidates we have selected, initially CR-001 and CR-002, may fail to be viable commercial products or the product candidates we do not select may have a greater likelihood of success.

Any approved products resulting from our current programs or any future program may not achieve adequate market acceptance among clinicians, patients, healthcare third-party payors, and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success and we may not generate any future revenue from the sale or licensing of such products.

Even if regulatory approval is obtained for a product candidate resulting from one of our current or future programs, they may not gain market acceptance among physicians, healthcare professionals, patients, healthcare payors, or the medical community. We may not generate or sustain revenue from sales of the product due to factors such as whether the product can be sold at a competitive cost and whether it will otherwise be accepted in the market. There are several approved products and product candidates in later stages of development for the treatment of solid tumors, including pembrolizumab. In addition, Opdivo, a PD-1 inhibitor, and Yervoy®, a CTLA-4 inhibitor, in combination are approved by

Table of Contents

the FDA for treating various cancers, including metastatic melanoma, advanced renal cell carcinoma, and certain types of colorectal cancer. CR-001 utilizes a proprietary anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody for its proposed method of action, and is designed to recapitulate the targeting, binding, cooperativity and pharmacokinetics of ivonescimab, an anti-PD-1/anti-VEGF bispecific antibody that demonstrated significantly improved PFS to market-leading pembrolizumab in a large third-party Phase 3 clinical trial. Although checkpoint inhibitors are highly effective in some patients, most patients with solid tumors fail to respond to these therapies. Furthermore, patients who do respond do not always achieve durable responses. With respect to CR-002 and CR-003, regarding ADC development, we are aware of other ADC product candidates in clinical development for solid tumor indications, including, but not limited to, PDL1V (Pfizer), HLX-43 (Henlius), sigvotatug vedotin (Pfizer). Market participants with significant influence over acceptance of new treatments, such as clinicians and third-party payors, may not adopt a biologic that uses cooperative binding qualities for our targeted indications, and we may not be able to convince the medical community and third-party payors to accept and use, or to provide favorable reimbursement for, any programs developed by us or our existing or future collaborators. Serious adverse events, including fatal pulmonary hemorrhage, observed in anti-VEGF inhibitors, such as bevacizumab, may adversely affect our ability to gain market acceptance. Market acceptance of our product candidates may be negatively impacted by potential poor performance of our competitors, including the occurrence of serious adverse events in such competitors’ clinical trials or failure by such competitors to obtain and maintain regulatory approval for their product candidates.

Sales of medical products also depend on the willingness of clinicians to prescribe the treatment. We cannot predict whether clinicians, clinicians’ organizations, hospitals, other healthcare providers, government agencies, or private insurers will determine that our product is safe, therapeutically effective, cost effective, or less burdensome as compared with competing treatments. If any of our product candidates are approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by such parties, we may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from that product candidate and may not become or remain profitable. Market acceptance of our product candidates will depend on many factors, including factors that are not within our control.

Certain of our programs may compete with our other programs, which could negatively impact our business and reduce our future revenue.

We are developing product candidates for the same indication, solid tumors, and may in the future develop our programs for other oncology indications. Each such program targets a different mechanism of action. However, developing multiple programs for a single indication may negatively impact our business if the programs compete with each other. For example, if multiple programs are conducting clinical trials at the same time, they could compete for the enrollment of patients. In addition, if multiple product candidates are approved for the same indication, they may compete for market share, which could limit our future revenue.

We intend to conduct clinical trials, initially for our CR-001 program and for future programs, at sites outside the United States, and the FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations.

We intend to conduct clinical trials for CR-001 outside of the United States, and expect to conduct one or more of our future clinical trials for CR-002, CR-003, and any other future programs outside the United States. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States, acceptance of this data is subject to conditions imposed by the FDA. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for regulatory approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, if the study was not otherwise subject to an IND, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for regulatory approval unless the study is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar requirements for clinical data gathered outside of their respective jurisdictions. 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 or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the relevant jurisdiction. If the FDA does not accept the data from any trial that we conduct outside the United States, it would likely result in the need for additional trials, which would be costly and time-consuming and would delay or permanently halt our development of the applicable product candidates. Even if the

Table of Contents

FDA accepted such data, it could require us to modify our planned clinical trials to receive clearance to initiate such trials in the United States or to continue such trials once initiated.

Further, conducting international clinical trials presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs that could restrict or limit our ability to conduct our clinical trials, the administrative burdens of conducting clinical trials under multiple sets of foreign regulations, foreign exchange fluctuations, diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries, as well as political and economic risks relevant to foreign countries.

Risks Related to Government Regulation

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time-consuming, and inherently unpredictable. If we are not able to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize, or will be delayed in commercializing, our product candidates, and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

The process of obtaining regulatory approvals, both in the United States and abroad, is unpredictable, expensive, and typically takes many years following commencement of clinical trials, if approval is obtained at all, and can vary substantially based upon a variety of factors, including the type, complexity, and novelty of the product candidates involved. We cannot commercialize product candidates in the United States without first obtaining regulatory approval from the FDA. Similarly, we cannot commercialize product candidates outside of the United States without obtaining regulatory approval from comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, including our lead program, CR-001, and other planned programs, CR-002, CR-003 and CR-004, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex, and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for each targeted indication, or with respect to our product candidates regulated as biologics, that such candidates are safe, pure, and potent for their intended uses. Securing regulatory approval also requires the submission of information about the drug manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the relevant regulatory authority. Further, our product candidates may not be effective, may be only moderately effective or may prove to have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities, or other characteristics that may preclude our obtaining regulatory approval. The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical, or other data.

Our product candidates could be delayed in receiving, or fail to receive, regulatory approval for many reasons, including:

•the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;

•we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate is safe, pure, potent, or effective for its proposed indication(s);

•the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical persuasiveness required by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval;

•serious and unexpected drug-related side effects may be experienced by patients in our clinical trials or by individuals using drugs similar to our product candidates;

•we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;

•the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be acceptable or sufficient to support the submission of a Biologics License Application (“BLA”) or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, and we may be required to conduct additional clinical trials;

•the FDA or the applicable foreign regulatory authority may disagree regarding the formulation, labeling, and/or the specifications of our product candidates;

Table of Contents

•the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and

•the approval policies or regulations of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

In addition, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may undergo leadership changes, change their policies, issue additional regulations, or revise existing regulations, or take other actions, which may impact our clinical development plans or prevent or delay approval of our programs under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain approvals and increase the costs of compliance.

Additionally, we expect that certain product candidates may be regulated as a combination product that consists of both a biologic and a medical device. Developing and obtaining regulatory approval for combination products can pose unique challenges because they involve components that are regulated under different types of regulatory requirements and potentially by different FDA centers. As a result, such product candidates may raise regulatory, policy and review management challenges. Differences in regulatory pathways for each component of a combination product can impact the regulatory processes for all aspects of product development and management, including clinical investigation, marketing applications, manufacturing and quality control, adverse event reporting, promotion and advertising, user fees and post approval modifications. Although the FDA and similar foreign regulatory agencies have systems in place for the review and approval of combination products such as ours, we may experience delays in the development and commercialization of our product candidates due to regulatory timing constraints and uncertainties in the product development and approval process.

Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA or foreign regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. The 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.

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 trials, 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. If we are not able to obtain, or if there are delays in obtaining, required regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we will not be able to commercialize, or will be delayed in commercializing, our product candidates and our ability to generate revenue will be materially impaired.

We may not be able to meet requirements for the chemistry, manufacturing, and control of our programs.

In order to receive approval of its products by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we must show that we and our contract manufacturing partners are able to characterize, control, and manufacture our drug products safely and in accordance with regulatory requirements. This includes manufacturing the active ingredient, developing an acceptable formulation, manufacturing the drug product, performing tests to adequately characterize the formulated product, documenting a repeatable manufacturing process, and demonstrating that our drug products meet stability requirements. Meeting these chemistry, manufacturing, and control requirements is a complex task that requires specialized expertise. If we are not able to meet the chemistry, manufacturing, and control requirements, we may not be successful in getting our products approved.

In addition, as product candidates progress through clinical trials to regulatory approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize safety, efficacy, stability, purity, yield and manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives and/or may lead to delays and additional costs. Additionally, any changes we may make to our product candidates may cause such candidates to perform differently than in prior clinical trials, or could negatively affect our ability to utilize or interpret our existing data. Such changes could delay initiation or completion of clinical trials, lead to negative trial results, require the conduct of bridging studies or clinical trials or the repetition of one or more studies or clinical trials, increase development costs, delay potential regulatory approval and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates or generate revenue.

Our product candidates for which we intend to seek approval as biologics may face competition sooner than anticipated.

Table of Contents

The Patient Protection and Affordable Act, as amended by the Healthcare and Education Reconciliation Act (the “ACA”), includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a highly similar or “biosimilar” product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first approved by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first approved. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency of their product.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as biologics under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products will depend on a number of uncertain marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of our product candidates, we will be subject to extensive 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 experiences unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

Any regulatory approvals that we may receive for our product candidates will require the submission of reports to regulatory authorities and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate, may contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, warnings, precautions, or contraindications, and may include burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. For example, the FDA may require a REMS in order to approve our product candidates, which could entail requirements for a medication guide, physician training, and 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 comparable foreign regulatory authorities approve our product candidates, our product candidates and the activities associated with their development and commercialization, including their design, testing, manufacture, safety, efficacy, recordkeeping, labeling, storage, approval, advertising, promotion, sale, distribution, import and export will be subject to comprehensive regulation by the FDA and other regulatory agencies in the United States and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as on-going compliance with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct following approval. In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic, unannounced inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with cGMPs.

If we or a regulatory authority discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facilities where the product is manufactured, or if we are unable to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility, or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing, restrictions on our ability to conduct clinical trials, including full or partial clinical holds on ongoing or planned trials, refusals to approve pending applications, restrictions on the manufacturing process, warning or untitled letters, civil and criminal penalties, injunctions, product seizures, detentions or import bans, voluntary or mandatory publicity requirements, and imposition of restrictions on operations, including costly new manufacturing requirements. The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue and could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.

The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change and additional government regulations may be promulgated that could prevent, limit or delay marketing authorization of any product candidates we develop. We also cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may be subject to enforcement action and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Table of Contents

For instance, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently undergoing a complete review process, 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 published a proposal for a new Directive and Regulation to revise the existing pharmaceutical legislation. The European Parliament and the Council of the EU adopted their respective positions on April 10, 2024 and June 4, 2025 and a common position on the text was agreed upon on December 11, 2025, in the context of subsequent inter-institutional trilogue negotiations. The proposed revisions remain to be adopted, and are not expected to become applicable before 2028.

Current and future U.S. healthcare reform legislation or regulation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain coverage for and commercialize any of our current or future product candidates and may adversely affect the prices we may set.

In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and affect our ability to profitably sell any of our current or future product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare.

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or the ACA, was enacted in the United States. The ACA established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents; extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs; expanded the entities eligible for discounts under the 340B drug pricing program; increased the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; established a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and established a Center for Medicare & Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending. Since its enactment, there have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, beginning April 1, 2013, Medicare payments to providers were reduced under the sequestration required by the Budget Control Act of 2011, which will remain in effect through the 2032 fiscal year, unless additional Congressional action is taken. Additionally, on January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. On March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminated the statutory cap on the Medicaid drug rebate, beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price.

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the United States of pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient assistance programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for products. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or the IRA, was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA (i) directs the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare; (ii) imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation; (iii) reduces the out-of-pocket cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries to $2,000 starting in 2025. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has and will continue to issue and update guidance as these programs are implemented. These provisions took effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023. The Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, published the negotiated prices for the initial ten drugs, which went into effect in 2026, and the subsequent 15 drugs, which will first be effective in 2027. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation that challenges the constitutionality of the IRA’s drug price negotiation program provisions. The outcome of this litigation as well as the effects of the IRA on the pharmaceutical industry cannot yet be fully determined but is likely to be significant. Additional drug pricing proposals could appear in future legislation.

Table of Contents

More recently, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which was enacted in July 2025, imposes significant reductions in the funding of the Medicaid program. Such reductions are expected to decrease the number of persons enrolled in Medicaid and reduce the services covered by Medicaid, which could adversely affect our sales of any product candidate that we commercialize.

The current Presidential administration is pursuing a two-fold strategy to reduce drug costs in the U.S. While it is unclear whether and how such policies will be implemented, the proposed policies are likely to have a negative impact on the pharmaceutical industry and on our ability to receive adequate revenues for our product candidates, if approved. As part of this strategy, President Trump has proposed imposing significant tariffs on pharmaceutical manufacturers that do not adopt pricing policies such as most favored nation pricing, which would tie the price for drugs in the U.S. to the lowest price in a group of other countries. In response, multiple manufacturers have reportedly entered into confidential pricing agreements with the federal government. In addition, the Trump administration is pursuing traditional regulatory pathways to impose drug pricing policies, although final regulations have not yet been published. In addition, pharmaceutical pricing and marketing has long been the subject of considerable discussion in Congress and among policymakers, and it is possible that Congress could enact additional laws that negatively affect the pharmaceutical industry.

At the state level, state governments have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access, marketing cost disclosure, drug price reporting and other transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Some states have enacted legislation creating so-called prescription drug affordability boards with the goal of imposing price limits on certain drugs in these states, while some states are also seeking to implement general, across the board price caps for pharmaceuticals, or are seeking to regulate drug distribution. Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for any of our current and future product candidates, if approved, or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We expect that these existing laws and other healthcare reform measures both at the federal and state level that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors.

In the EU, similar developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the EU or EU member state level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the EU, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than EU, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most EU member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Coupled with ever-increasing EU and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved. In markets outside of the United States and EU, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

On December 13, 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (“HTA”) amending Directive 2011/24/EU, was adopted. The Regulation entered into force in January 2022 and has been applicable since January 2025, with phased implementation based on the type of product, i.e. oncology and advanced therapy medicinal products as of 2025, orphan medicinal products as of 2028, and all other medicinal products by 2030. The Regulation intends to boost cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and provide the basis for cooperation at the EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. It will permit EU member states to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the highest potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU member states

Table of Contents

will continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technology, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement.

Our revenue prospects could be affected by changes in healthcare spending and policy in the United States and abroad. We operate in a highly regulated industry and new laws, regulations or judicial decisions, or new interpretations of existing laws, regulations or decisions, related to healthcare availability, the method of delivery or payment for healthcare products and services could negatively impact our business, operations and financial condition. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare and/or impose price controls may adversely affect:

•the demand for our current or future product candidates, if we obtain regulatory approval;

•our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our products;

•our ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement approval for a product;

•our ability to generate revenue and achieve or maintain profitability;

•the level of taxes that we are required to pay; and

•the availability of capital.

We are subject to various U.S. federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations, which could increase compliance costs, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could harm our reputation, subject us to significant fines and liability or otherwise adversely affect our business.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations, and customers may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell, and distribute our product candidates, if approved. any products for which we obtain regulatory approval. Such laws include:

•the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or certain rebates), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, in return for, either the referral of an individual or the purchase, lease, or order, or arranging for or recommending the purchase, lease, or order of any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

•the federal false claims laws, including the civil False Claims Act, and civil monetary penalties laws, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or from knowingly making or causing to be made a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. Manufacturers can be held liable under the federal False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims. The federal False Claims Act also permits a private individual acting as a “whistleblower” to bring actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the federal False Claims Act and to share in any monetary recovery. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act;

•the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

Table of Contents

•the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to CMS information related to payments and other “transfers of value” made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician practitioners (physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified nurse anesthetists, anesthesiology assistants and certified nurse-midwives), and teaching hospitals and other healthcare providers, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members; and

•analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers; some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government and may require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; some state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to report information on the pricing of certain drug products; and some state and local laws that require the registration or pharmaceutical sales representatives.

Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to it, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from government-funded healthcare programs, integrity oversight and reporting obligations to resolve allegations of non-compliance, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against it, our business may be impaired.

The successful commercialization of any of our current or future product candidates, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish coverage, adequate reimbursement levels and favorable pricing policies.

The availability of coverage and the adequacy of reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford prescription medications such as any of our current or future product candidates, if approved. Our ability to achieve coverage and acceptable levels of reimbursement for our products by third-party payors will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize those products. Accordingly, we will need to successfully implement a coverage and reimbursement strategy for any approved product candidate. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments or other cost-sharing that patients find unacceptably high.

Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for pharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs when an equivalent generic drug or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our products as substitutable and offer to reimburse patients only for a less expensive competitor product. Even if we are successful in demonstrating improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our products, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our products. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs will be covered. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage or implement prior authorization or step therapy programs for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse patients who use such therapies, which may be time-consuming or costly for patients and lead to a reduction in revenue. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for any of our current or future product candidates.

Table of Contents

Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product candidate that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, the level of reimbursement. In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs.

Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time-consuming, costly and uncertain. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs. However, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, and, in some cases, at short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely. For products administered under the supervision of a physician, obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such drugs. Additionally, separate reimbursement for the product itself or the treatment or procedure in which the product is used may not be available, which may impact physician utilization.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of any of our current or future product candidates, if approved in these jurisdictions. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our products. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our products due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative and regulatory changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, and prescription drugs, surgical procedures and other treatments in particular, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. See “Risks Related to Government Regulation—Current and future U.S. healthcare reform legislation or regulation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain coverage for and commercialize any of our current or future product candidates and may adversely affect the prices we may set” for additional related information.

We are subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws, and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm our business.

We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Controls, the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contractors, and other collaborators from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. We may engage third parties to sell our products outside the United States, to conduct clinical trials, and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations, and other regulatory approvals. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities, and other organizations. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees,

Table of Contents

agents, contractors, and other collaborators, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences.

Governments outside the United States tend to impose strict price controls, which may adversely affect our revenue, if any.

In some countries, particularly member states of the EU (“EU member states”), the pricing of prescription medicinal product is subject to governmental control. EU member states are free to restrict the range of pharmaceutical products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement, and to control the prices and reimbursement levels of pharmaceutical products for human use. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of regulatory approval for a medicinal product. In addition, there can be considerable pressure by governments and other stakeholders on prices and reimbursement levels, including as part of cost containment measures. Political, economic, and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU member states and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU member states, can further reduce prices. To obtain coverage and reimbursement or pricing approvals in some countries, we or current or future collaborators may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. This Health Technology Assessment (“HTA process”), which is currently governed by the national laws of the individual EU member states, is the procedure according to which the assessment of the public health impact, therapeutic impact and the economic and societal impact of use of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medicinal products will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU member states Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If reimbursement of any product candidate approved for marketing is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business, financial condition, results of operations, or prospects could be materially and adversely affected.

Brexit could lead to legal uncertainty and potentially divergent national laws and regulations, including those related to the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals, as the United Kingdom (“UK”) determines which EU laws to replicate or replace. If the UK were to significantly alter its regulations affecting the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals, we could face significant new costs.

Disruptions at the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies and regulatory authorities caused by funding shortages, changes or reductions in agency personnel, or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner, or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA to review regulatory filings and our ability to commence human clinical trials can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC, and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for the review and approval of applications for clinical trial or marketing authorization, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in previous years, including in 2018 and 2019 and 2025, the U.S. government shut down and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. In addition, the current U.S. Presidential administration has issued certain policies and Executive Orders directed towards reducing the employee headcount and costs associated with U.S. administrative agencies, including the FDA, and it remains unclear the degree to which these efforts may limit or otherwise adversely affect the FDA’s ability to conduct routine activities, or otherwise affect our ability to progress development of our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, if there is a significant change or reduction in agency personnel, or if funding shortages prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or

Table of Contents

other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We do not currently solely own any issued patents or pending patent applications. Therefore, our ability to obtain and protect our patent rights, and protect other proprietary rights, is uncertain, exposing us to the possible loss of competitive advantage.

Our success depends, and will continue to depend, in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection for our platform technologies, programs, and their uses, as well as our ability to operate without infringing on or violating the proprietary rights of others. Our ability to protect our technologies from unauthorized making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing by third parties may depend on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents that cover these activities. We rely, and will continue to rely, upon a combination of patents, trademarks, trade secret protection, confidentiality agreements, and licensing and collaboration arrangements to protect and expand the intellectual property related to our programs and technologies. While we do not currently solely own any patents or patent applications, we in-license certain patent rights from Paragon pursuant to those certain License Agreements, dated each of April 28, 2025 (the “CR-001 License Agreement”) and November 5, 2025 (the “CR-002 License Agreement”), each by and between us and Paragon (collectively, the “Paragon License Agreements”) relating to certain of our product candidates, and patent rights from Sichuan Kelun-Biotech Biopharmaceutical Co., Ltd. (“Kelun”) pursuant to that certain License and Collaboration Agreement, dated December 2, 2025, by and between us and Kelun relating to CR-003 outside of mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan. Paragon has filed and we, alone and/or jointly with Paragon, have filed or intend to file provisional patent applications directed to antibodies that target PD-1 and VEGF, including, for example, applications covering composition of matter, dosing, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies, including, but not limited to, CR-001. In addition, Paragon has filed and we, alone and/or jointly with Paragon, intend to file provisional patent applications directed to ADCs, including, for example, applications covering composition of matter, dosing, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies, including, but not limited to, CR-002. Kelun has filed, and we and Kelun, alone and/or jointly, intend to file patent applications directed to ADCs, including, for example, applications covering composition of matter, dosing, pharmaceutical formulations, and methods of using such antibodies, including, but not limited to, CR-003. However, we or our licensors may not be able to protect our owned or in-licensed intellectual property rights throughout the world and the legal systems in certain countries may not favor enforcement or protection of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property. Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on programs worldwide would be expensive and our intellectual property rights in some foreign jurisdictions can be less extensive than those in the United States; the reverse may also occur. As such, we may not have patents in all countries or all major markets and may not be able to obtain patents in all jurisdictions even if we apply for them. Our competitors may operate in countries where we do not have patent protection and can freely use our technologies and discoveries in such countries to the extent such technologies and discoveries are publicly known or disclosed in countries where we do not have patent protection and/or pending patent applications.

Our intellectual property portfolio is at an early stage. We do not currently solely own any issued patents or pending patent applications. Our in-licensed or future solely owned patent applications may not result in patents being issued. Any issued patents may not afford sufficient protection of our programs or their intended uses against competitors, nor can there be any assurance that the patents issued will not be infringed, designed around, invalidated by third parties, or effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies, products, or programs. Even if these patents are granted, they may be difficult to enforce. If we do not obtain patent coverage for the work we are conducting, or if we obtain such rights but they are invalidated or rendered unenforceable, we may be unable to exclude competitors from pursuing and marketing the same or similar product candidates. Other risks we face if we are not able to obtain and maintain patent coverage for our product candidates are the reduction in valuation of our product candidates, and ultimately of us as a company, by potential investors, and our inability to assert claims for infringement against third parties or counterclaim against such third parties or negotiate more advantageous settlement parameters. Further, any issued patents that we may license or own covering our programs could be narrowed or found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court and/or before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, including the United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”). Further, if we encounter delays in our clinical trials or delays in obtaining regulatory approval, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection may be reduced. Thus, the patents that we may own and/or license may not afford us any meaningful competitive advantage.

In addition to seeking patents for some of our technology and programs, we may also rely on trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology, and other proprietary information, to maintain our competitive position. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our

Table of Contents

facilities, or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials, or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. In order to protect our proprietary technology and processes, we rely, and will continue to rely, in part on confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements, or other similar agreements prior to beginning research and/or disclosing proprietary information with parties, such as collaborators, employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, and sponsored researchers and other advisors. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants under which they are obligated to maintain confidentiality and to assign their inventions to us. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. These agreements may not effectively prevent disclosure of confidential information and may not provide an adequate remedy in the event of unauthorized disclosure of confidential information. We may need to share our proprietary information, including trade secrets, with current or future business partners, licensors, collaborators, contractors, and others located in countries at heightened risk of theft of trade secrets, including through direct intrusion by private parties or state actors and those affiliated with or controlled by state actors. In addition, while we undertake efforts to protect our trade secrets and other confidential information from disclosure, others may independently discover trade secrets and proprietary information, and in such cases, we may not be able to assert any trade secret rights against such party. Enforcing a claim that a party disclosed or misappropriated our trade secrets, or securing title to an employee- or consultant-developed invention if a dispute arises, is challenging and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside of the United States may be less willing to protect trade secrets. Costly and time-consuming litigation could be necessary to enforce and determine the scope of our proprietary rights and failure to obtain or maintain trade secret protection could adversely affect our competitive business position.

The enforceability of confidentiality agreements may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors, and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development, or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business.

Lastly, if our trademarks and trade names are not registered or adequately protected, then we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected.

If we are unable to obtain or maintain necessary rights to our programs through acquisitions and in-licenses, our business may be materially harmed.

Because our development programs currently rely, and will continue to rely, on intellectual property rights in-licensed from Paragon and Kelun under each of the Paragon License Agreements and Kelun License Agreement, respectively, and may in the future require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these third-party proprietary rights. We may in the future be unable to acquire or in-license compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our programs. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources, and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we do obtain, our ability to commercialize any of our targeted therapeutics, if approved, would likely be delayed, or we may have to abandon development of the relevant program, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Certain of our current or future in-licensed patent families were or may be drafted, filed, and prosecuted by our current or future licensors, including Paragon and Kelun, and even where we now control the right to prosecution of certain in-licensed patent families, we are and may in the future be required to solicit input and consider comments from Paragon, Kelun or other future licensors. Additionally, while we have obtained or intend to obtain the right to control the prosecution, defense, maintenance, and enforcement of certain patents relating to our programs, there may be times when the filing and prosecution activities for patents and patent applications relating to our programs are solely or substantially

Table of Contents

controlled by our future licensors or collaboration partners. If we, Paragon, Kelun or any of our future licensors or collaboration partners fail to prosecute, maintain, and enforce such patents and patent applications in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business, including by payment of all applicable fees for patents covering our product candidates, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected, and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, selling, and importing competing products. In addition, even if patents are issued from patent applications prosecuted by our licensors, our licensors may determine not to pursue litigation against third parties that are infringing these patents or may pursue such litigation less aggressively than we would. In addition, even where we are granted the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed to and from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensees, our current or future licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over patent prosecution.

Our current or future licensors, including Paragon and Kelun, may rely on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our current or future licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-license. If other third parties have ownership rights to our current or future in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

It is possible that we may be unable to obtain licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, including with respect to the use, field, or territory of the licensed intellectual property, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, programs, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current technology, manufacturing methods, programs, or future methods or products resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant.

Disputes may arise between us and our current or future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including: the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues; whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement; our right to sublicense patents and other rights to third parties; our right to transfer or assign the license; the inventorship and ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our current or future licensors or partners; and the priority of invention of patented technology. If we or our current or future licensors breach the terms of our license agreements, such breach may have a material adverse effect on our business and the commercialization efforts for our programs.

Our current collaboration with Kelun and any collaboration arrangements that we may enter into in the future may not be successful, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our products.

Our current or future collaborations, including our current collaboration with Kelun, may not be successful. The success of our collaboration arrangements will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators. Collaborations are subject to numerous risks, which may include that:

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

•collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on trial or test results, changes in their strategic focus due to the acquisition of competitive products, availability of funding, or other external factors, such as a business combination that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;

•disputes may arise between us and a collaborator that cause the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our current or future products or that results in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;

Table of Contents

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

•a collaborator with marketing, manufacturing and distribution rights to one or more products may not commit sufficient resources to or otherwise not perform satisfactorily in carrying out these activities;

•we could grant exclusive rights to our collaborators that would prevent us from collaborating with others;

•collaborators may use our intellectual property or 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 liability or business risk;

•collaborations may be terminated, and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable current or future products or products;

•collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering our product candidates that results from our collaborating with them, and in such cases, we would not have the exclusive right to develop or commercialize such intellectual property; and

•a collaborator’s sales and marketing activities or other operations may not be in compliance with applicable laws resulting in civil or criminal proceedings.

We may be subject to patent infringement claims or may need to file claims to protect our intellectual property, which could result in substantial costs and liability and prevent us from commercializing our potential products.

Because the intellectual property landscape in the biotechnology industry is rapidly evolving and interdisciplinary, it is difficult to conclusively assess our freedom to operate and guarantee that we can operate without unintentionally infringing on or violating third-party rights. If certain of our product candidates are ultimately granted regulatory approval, patent rights held by third parties, if found to be valid and enforceable, could be alleged to render one or more of our product candidates, or our actions relating thereto, infringing. If a third party successfully brings a claim against us, we may be required to pay substantial damages, be enjoined and potentially forced to abandon any affected product candidate and/or seek a license from the patent holder, which may include ongoing royalty obligations. In addition, any intellectual property claims (e.g., patent infringement or trade secret misappropriation) brought against us, whether or not successful, may cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert the attention of our management and key personnel from other business concerns. We cannot be certain that our current or future owned or in-licensed patent applications and patents, if filed and issued, will not be challenged by others, whether in the course of litigation or in agencies like the USPTO or foreign administrative bodies. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex intellectual property litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds.

Competitors may infringe or otherwise violate our current or future patents, trademarks, copyrights, or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or other violations, we may be required to file claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any such claims could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us, including claims alleging that we infringe their patents or other intellectual property rights and/or that our patents are invalid and/or unenforceable. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court or administrative body may decide that one or more of the patents we assert is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to prevent the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court or administrative body may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In such a case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such marks. In any intellectual property litigation, even if we are successful, any award of monetary damages or other remedy we receive may not be commercially valuable.

Further, we may be required to protect our future patents, if filed and issued, through procedures created to challenge the validity of a patent before administrative bodies in the United States such as the USPTO or abroad. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, e.g., opposition proceedings. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding could reduce the scope or enforceability of, or invalidate, our patent rights, which could adversely affect our competitive position. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action.

Table of Contents

In addition, if our programs are found to infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, these third parties may assert infringement claims against our current or future licensors or licensees and other parties with whom we have business relationships and we may be required to indemnify those parties for any damages they suffer as a result of these claims, which may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of licensees and other parties regardless of the merits of such claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of those parties or may be required to obtain licenses for the products they use.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or other proceedings.

We may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor or that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties.

As is common in the biotechnology industry, in addition to our employees, we engage the service of consultants to assist us in the development of our programs. Many of these consultants, and many of our employees, were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors. We could in the future be subject to claims that we or our employees have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed alleged trade secrets or other confidential information of former employers or competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how, or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may become subject to claims that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement, or that we or these individuals have, inadvertently or otherwise, used or disclosed the alleged trade secrets or other proprietary information of a former employer or competitor.

While we may litigate to defend itself against these claims, even if we are successful, litigation could result in substantial costs and could be a distraction to management. If our defenses to these claims fail, in addition to requiring us to pay monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our programs, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors, or hire employees or consultants, each of which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations, and financial condition. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management.

Changes to patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Although we do not currently own or in-license any granted patents, if we obtain such patents in the future, changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of patent laws in the United States, including patent reform legislation such as the Leahy-Smith Act could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our owned and in-licensed patent applications, if any, and the maintenance, enforcement, or defense of our owned and in-licensed issued patents, if any. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These changes include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art, provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents, and enable third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent at USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first-to-file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. As such, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications, if any, and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, if any, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Additionally, the USPTO and patent offices in other jurisdictions have often required that patent applications directed to pharmaceutical and/or biotechnology-related inventions be limited or narrowed substantially to cover only the specific innovations exemplified in the patent application, thereby limiting the scope of protection against competitive challenges. Accordingly, even if we or our licensors are able to obtain patents, the patents might be substantially narrower than anticipated. Thus, there is no

Table of Contents

assurance as to the degree and range of protections any of our patents, if issued, may afford us or whether patents will be issued.

CBIO US Equity

CBIO · 10-K · period ended 2025-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

CBIO US Equity☆

CBIO · 10-K · period ended 2025-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

CBIO US Equity