CERS US Equity☆

Item 1A. Risk Factors

Our business faces significant risks. If any of the events or circumstances described in the following risks actually occurs, our business may suffer, the trading price of our common stock could decline and our financial condition or results of operations could be harmed. These risks should be read in conjunction with the other information set forth in this annual report on Form 10-K. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. There may be additional risks faced by our business. Other events that we do not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial also may adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations.

Risks Related to Our Business and Industry

The evolving effects of the COVID-19 pandemic have materially affected and may continue to materially affect how we, our customers, and our suppliers are operating our businesses, and the duration and extent to which these effects will impact our future results of operations and overall financial performance remains uncertain.

As global economic conditions recover from the COVID-19 pandemic, business activity may not recover as quickly as anticipated, and it is not possible at this time to estimate the long-term impact that the COVID-19 pandemic could have on our business, as the impact will depend on future developments, which are highly uncertain and cannot be predicted. Continued remote work policies, quarantines, shelter-in-place and similar government orders, shutdowns or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations related to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic has materially affected and may continue to materially affect how we, our customers, and our suppliers are operating our businesses.

Our sales efforts have historically involved significant in-person interaction with potential customers and distributors. With respect to our commercial activities, many of our hospital and blood bank customers have been hesitant to hold in-person meetings and continue to predominantly default to video conferencing. We have attempted to shift our sales activities to video conferencing and other similar customer interaction models and we have found these alternative approaches to have varying degrees of effectiveness in comparison to in-person sales efforts. In addition, many of our blood center and hospital customers and study sites have experienced staffing shortages. As a result, our sales and marketing efforts may be slower than expected or may require compliance with new credentialing certifications by our personnel. To the extent that our employees’ ability to gain access to hospitals and their personnel remains limited, our commercial and sales interactions with those hospitals and our ability to introduce the INTERCEPT Blood System, including IFC, may continue to be impaired. In addition, many new customers and prospective customers have been impacted by the COVID-19 pandemic and the following staffing shortages and their ability to on-board, train staff and implement new technologies, including INTERCEPT, has and may continue to be negatively impacted, which may lead such customers to instead choose to utilize other allowable methods with which they have more familiarity. Blood products are currently in extremely short supply which is impacting our customers. Customers whose operations have been impacted may have difficulty paying timely, may ask for price reductions or may delay or cancel public tenders. In addition, we understand that use of blood components may at times be negatively impacted which in turn, may negatively impact our potential product revenues from existing and prospective customers. Conversely, either due to the pandemic or ongoing concern about pandemic preparedness, certain existing, new and prospective customers have and may continue to ask for increased utilization of our products beyond what was forecast, and we may not be able to timely satisfy this increase in demand. In addition, while our suppliers have initiated business continuity plans with minimal expected disruption to our supply, we cannot be certain that any prolonged, intensified or worsened effect from the pandemic including the impact of emerging variant strains of the SARS-CoV-2 virus would not negatively impact our supply chain. For example, Fresenius, our primary manufacturing partner for our disposable kits, had to reconfigure production workflow to safely produce INTERCEPT disposable kits and in the future, restrictions and other limitations on Fresenius’ ability to conduct business in the ordinary course could negatively impact production of INTERCEPT disposable kits. All of the aforementioned could adversely affect our sales, operating results and overall financial performance.

The COVID-19 pandemic has also negatively impacted our ability to perform many clinical trials, studies and activities, including those covered by our agreement with BARDA. Our ongoing and anticipated clinical trials, the post-approval platelet studies, as well as studies to support label expansion for the platelet system in the U.S. have been delayed because of the COVID-19 pandemic. For example, for a brief time, several of the hospital clinical trial sites for our RedeS and ReCePI studies suspended enrollment and several red blood cell production partners for the studies suspended production in order to conserve red blood cells to meet hospital demand during the pandemic. Many hospital sites are proceeding at a reduced capacity and many are experiencing staffing shortages. Accordingly, many of the activities expected by BARDA have been delayed and will require an extension of time and/or additional funds under the contract to complete. In addition, should the clinical studies and other activities supported by our BARDA contract get further delayed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic or otherwise, we will need to continue to rely on modifications and extensions to the BARDA agreement to fund the completion of those activities. Should BARDA disallow any modification or extension, we will need to pay for the costs to complete the activities or stop pursuing them altogether. Further delays may recur in the future if patient enrollment sites need to pause participation in our clinical trials and studies and we cannot be certain that further disruption due to the COVID-19 pandemic can be avoided. Should the COVID-19 pandemic persist, continue to worsen, or resurface at locations where we conduct studies or clinical trials, our ability to commence and complete any contemplated studies may be negatively impacted. Furthermore, should we be unable to deploy personnel, derive a benefit from fixed study costs or generate data from clinical sites and studies reimbursed under our contract

22

with BARDA, our cash flows would be negatively impacted and/or we may have to initiate furloughs and layoffs, which would prove disruptive to our management and operations. This in turn would impair our ability to complete ongoing studies or commence new studies.

The duration and extent of the impact from the COVID-19 pandemic depends on future developments that cannot be accurately predicted at this time, such as the severity and transmission rate of the virus, including any variants, and the extent and effectiveness of containment actions. Despite the increased availability of vaccines, due to the continuing and evolving nature of the COVID-19 pandemic and the potential for periods of increases in case numbers and emergence and spread of virus variants in markets and communities in which we and our customers operate, it is not possible for us to accurately predict the duration or magnitude of the adverse impacts of the pandemic and its effects on our business, results of operations, or financial condition. In addition, while the potential economic impact brought by the COVID-19 pandemic may be difficult to assess or predict, it has significantly disrupted global financial markets, and may limit our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. As a result of stimulus programs put in place over the past two years, the U.S. and many countries are currently experiencing an inflationary environment. This has led to the U.S. Federal Reserve taking action to raise interest rates which in turn has negatively impacted equity values, including the value of our common stock. Furthermore, our labor and vendor costs may rise in an inflationary environment, costs to transport our products may increase, and availability and timeliness of shipping may be negatively impacted. To the extent the COVID-19 pandemic adversely affects our business and results of operations, it may also have the effect of heightening many of the other risks and uncertainties described elsewhere in this ‘‘Risk Factors’’ section.

We depend substantially upon the commercial success of the INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets, plasma and cryoprecipitation in the U.S., and our inability to successfully commercialize the INTERCEPT Blood System in the U.S. would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Our business is dependent on our ability to grow and sustain commercialization of the INTERCEPT Blood System in the U.S. Significant product revenue from customers in the U.S. may not occur consistently, if at all, if we are unable to demonstrate that our products are economical, safe and efficacious for potential customers. Similar to our experience in foreign jurisdictions, some potential customers in the U.S. have chosen to first validate our technology or conduct other pre-adoption activities prior to purchasing or deciding whether to adopt the INTERCEPT Blood System for commercial use, which may never occur. Further, new hospital customers of any of our blood center customers will need to go through the administrative process of generating internal tracking codes to integrate INTERCEPT-treated products into their inventories, which may further delay customer adoption in the U.S. These administrative processes necessary for implementation of INTERCEPT are further strained due to the staffing shortages seen globally.

On October 1, 2021, all U.S. blood centers were required to be compliant with the FDA guidance document, “Bacterial Risk Control Strategies for Blood Collection Establishments and Transfusion Services to Enhance the Safety and Availability of Platelets for Transfusion,” or the Final Guidance Document. Although the INTERCEPT Blood System is one of the options available to U.S. blood centers for compliance with the Final Guidance Document, we cannot predict if U.S. customers will continue to adopt INTERCEPT over other options or at what levels. If we are unable to successfully support the commercialization of our platelet system to U.S. customers that have elected to use the INTERCEPT Blood System, then those customers may be required to adopt competing products in order to comply with the Final Guidance Document. Further, U.S. blood centers will be required to change their historical operating practices to conform to our product specifications, or they or their hospital customers may be required to elect more than one option under the Final Guidance Document in order to comply, or they or their hospital customers may choose competing products to comply with the Final Guidance Document. We may be unable to subsequently convert blood centers that chose competing products to the platelet system, which would limit our market potential. If we are not successful in achieving market adoption of the INTERCEPT Blood System in the U.S., we may never generate substantial product revenue, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects would be materially and adversely affected.

In any event, our ability to successfully commercialize the INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets, plasma, and cryoprecipitation in the U.S. will depend on our ability to:

•

adequately respond to the potential increased U.S. customer demand resulting from the implementation of the Final Guidance Document;

•

achieve market acceptance and generate product sales through execution of sales agreements on commercially reasonable terms;

•

enter into and maintain sufficient manufacturing arrangements for the U.S. market with our third-party suppliers;

•

support blood center manufacturing partners in obtaining Biologics License Application, or BLAs, for interstate commerce;

•

effectively create market demand for the INTERCEPT Blood System through our education, marketing and sales activities;

•

hire, train, deploy, support and maintain a qualified U.S.-based commercial organization and field sales force;

23

•

expand the labeled indications of use for the INTERCEPT Blood System and/or design, develop, test and obtain regulatory approval or certification for new product configurations;

•

comply with requirements established by the FDA, including post-marketing requirements and label restrictions; and

•

comply with other U.S. healthcare regulatory requirements.

In addition to the other risks described herein, our ability to successfully commercialize the INTERCEPT Blood System for platelets, plasma and cryoprecipitation in the U.S. is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including those related to:

•

the impact of macroeconomic developments, such as general political, health and economic conditions, including the Ukraine-Russia conflict, economic slowdowns, recessions, inflation, rising interest rates and tightening of credit markets on our business;

•

the COVID-19 pandemic and its effect on customers, hospitals, suppliers and our employees;

•

staffing shortages at blood centers, hospitals, study sites or suppliers;

•

the highly concentrated U.S. blood collection market that is dominated by a small number of blood collection organizations;

•

availability of donors;

•

regulatory and licensing requirements, including the FDA Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, or CBER, licensing processes and its BLA requirements, that U.S.-based blood centers are required to follow in order to obtain and maintain the required site-specific licenses to engage in interstate transport of blood components processed using the INTERCEPT Blood System;

•

changed or increased regulatory restrictions or requirements;

•

our ability to meet regulatory requirements for any changes to our products, including component composition, manufacturing process, and location;

•

the amount available for reimbursement pursuant to codes we have obtained under the Healthcare Common Procedure Coding System, or HCPCS, or New Technology Add-On Payment, or NTAP, and pricing for outpatient use of INTERCEPT-treated blood components;

•

any supply or manufacturing problems or delays arising with any of our suppliers, many of whom are our sole qualified suppliers for the particular product or component they manufacture, including the ability of our suppliers to maintain FDA approval to manufacture the INTERCEPT Blood System and to comply with FDA-mandated current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, and Quality System Regulation, or QSR, requirements;

•

our and our suppliers ability to produce sufficient quantity of product to meet the growing demand for our products, especially in light of the Final Guidance Document;

•

any supply or manufacturing problems or delays arising from our customers third-party suppliers whose products are used in combination and compliance with our products including customers third-party suppliers’ ability to maintain FDA approval to manufacture the INTERCEPT Blood System and to comply with FDA-mandated cGMP and QSR requirements;

•

ability of our contracted blood center manufacturing partners to produce IFC at sufficient quantities and at acceptable quality levels;

•

dependency upon any third-party manufacturer that supplies products required by blood centers to process and store blood components consistent with our approved specifications and claims, including but not limited to, apheresis collection devices, disposable blood bags and reagents, and platelet additive solution, or PAS, including those third-party suppliers’ ability to maintain FDA or other regulatory approvals to manufacture their products and to comply with FDA-mandated cGMP and QSR requirements;

•

our ability to obtain patents, protect trade secrets, prevent others from infringing on our proprietary rights, and operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties;

•

changes in healthcare laws and policy, including changes in requirements for blood product coverage by U.S. federal healthcare programs; and

•

acceptance of the INTERCEPT Blood System as safe, effective and economical from the broad constituencies involved in the healthcare system.

24

The INTERCEPT Blood System may not achieve broad market adoption.

In order to maintain or increase market adoption of the INTERCEPT Blood System and to increase market demand, we must address issues and concerns from broad constituencies involved in the healthcare system, from blood centers to patients, transfusing physicians, key opinion leaders, hospitals, private and public sector payors, regulatory bodies and public health authorities. We may be unable to demonstrate to these constituencies that the INTERCEPT Blood System is safe, effective and economical or that the benefits of using the INTERCEPT Blood System products justify their cost and/or outweigh their risks.

The use of the platelet system results in some processing loss of platelets. Despite having claims elsewhere for use of INTERCEPT-treated platelets up to seven days, we have not been able to satisfy the FDAs requirement to obtain a seven-day storage claim for INTERCEPT-treated platelets. As a result, customers or prospective customers may adopt competing solutions if they perceive that:

•

the loss of platelets leads to increased costs, or the perception of increased costs for our customers;

•

the use of our product in any way constrains the availability of platelets due to platelet loss;

•

our customers or prospective customers believe that the loss of platelets reduces the efficacy of the transfusable unit; or

•

our process requires changes in blood center collection processes or clinical regimens to address platelet loss.

Additionally, existing customers may not believe they can justify any perceived operational change or inefficiency either generally or in conjunction with a blood component availability shortage. This concern may be exacerbated during the current blood shortage crisis. Certain studies have indicated that transfusion of conventionally prepared platelets may yield higher post-transfusion platelet counts (according to a measurement called “corrected count increment”) and may be more effective than transfusion of INTERCEPT-treated platelets. Although certain other studies demonstrate that INTERCEPT-treated platelets retain therapeutic function comparable to conventional platelets, prospective customers may choose not to adopt our platelet system due to considerations relating to corrected count increment or other factors.

The INTERCEPT Blood System does not inactivate all known pathogens, which may limit its market adoption. For example, our products have not been demonstrated to be effective in the reduction of certain non-lipid-enveloped viruses, including hepatitis A and E viruses, and human parvovirus B-19, due to the biology of these viruses. Although we have shown high levels of reduction of a broad spectrum of lipid-enveloped viruses, INTERCEPT’s inability to inactivate, or limited reduction of certain non-lipid-enveloped viruses may negatively impact the decision to adopt by prospective customers. Similarly, although our products have been demonstrated to effectively inactivate spore-forming bacteria, our products have not been shown to be effective in reducing bacterial spores once formed. Furthermore, due to limitations of detective tests, we cannot exclude that a sufficient quantity of pathogen or pathogens beyond the detection limits may still be present in active form, which could present a risk of infection to the transfused patient. Should INTERCEPT-treated components contain detectable levels of pathogens after treatment, the efficacy of INTERCEPT may be called into question, whether or not any remaining pathogens are the result of INTERCEPT’s efficacy, the limitations of testing methodologies or other factors. Such uncertainties may limit the market adoption of our products.

We have conducted studies of our products in both in vitro and in vivo environments using well-established tests that are accepted by regulatory bodies. However, we cannot be certain that the results of these in vitro and in vivo studies accurately predict the actual results in humans in all cases. In addition, strains of infectious agents in living donors may be different from those strains commercially available or for which we have tested and for which we have received approval of the inactivation claims for our products. To the extent that actual results in human patients differ, commercially available or tested strains prove to be different, or customers or potential customers perceive that actual results differ from the results of our in vitro or in vivo testing, market acceptance of our products may be negatively impacted.

If customers experience operational or technical problems with the use of INTERCEPT Blood System products, market acceptance may be reduced or delayed. For example, if adverse events arise from incomplete reduction of pathogens, improper processing or user error, or if testing of INTERCEPT-treated blood samples fails to reliably confirm pathogen reduction, whether or not directly attributable to the INTERCEPT Blood System, customers may refrain from purchasing our products. We have recently learned of instances where, following treatment with INTERCEPT, mishandling of the treated blood components has introduced environmental bacterium. We must help our blood center customers to remain or increase their vigilance in adopting best practices regarding blood component handling. Failure to adequately address this risk may call into question the efficacy of using pathogen reduction.

Furthermore, should customers communicate operational problems or suspected product failure, we will need to investigate and report imputability to the relevant regulatory authorities in a timely manner. We or others may be required to file reports on such complaints or product failure before we have the ability to obtain conclusive data as to imputability which may cause concern with existing and prospective customers or regulators. Should customers feel that INTERCEPT treatment has a negative impact on the number of transfusable platelet units able to be manufactured from available donors, our ability to educate a blood center on the benefits of treating increasing proportions of its platelet units may be negatively impacted. Moreover, there is a risk that further studies that we or others may conduct, including the post-approval studies we are required to conduct as a condition to the FDA approval of the platelet system, will show results inconsistent with previous studies. Should this happen, potential customers may delay or choose not to adopt our

25

products and existing customers may cease using our products. In addition, some hospitals may decide to purchase and transfuse both INTERCEPT-treated blood components and conventional blood components, including IFC which we have very limited experience selling directly to hospitals. Managing such a dual inventory of blood products may be challenging, and hospitals may need to amend their product labels and inventory management systems before being able to move forward with INTERCEPT. This may require coordination between hospital suppliers, blood centers, or us, which in turn may cause delays in market adoption. In addition, customers may require certain changes to our products for any number of reasons. Complying with such requests may prove costly, and may create complexities surrounding the manufacturing of disposable kits, compliance with regulatory authorities, blood center usage, or inventory management. Conversely, failure to comply with such requests from customers may result in damage to our relationship or the potential loss of customer business.

Market adoption of our products is also affected by blood center and healthcare facility budgets and the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from governments, managed care payors, such as insurance companies, and/or other third parties. In many jurisdictions, due to the structure of the blood products industry, we have little control over budget and reimbursement discussions, which generally occur between blood centers, healthcare facilities such as hospitals, and national or regional ministries of health and private payors. Even if a particular blood center is prepared to adopt the INTERCEPT Blood System, its hospital customers may not accept or may not have the budget to purchase INTERCEPT-treated blood products. Since blood centers would likely not eliminate the practice of screening donors or testing blood for some pathogens prior to transfusion, even after implementing our products, some blood centers may not be able to identify enough cost offsets or hospital pricing increases to afford to purchase our products. Budgetary concerns may be further exacerbated by economic legislation in certain countries and by proposals by legislators at both the federal and, in some cases, state levels, regulators, healthcare facilities and third-party payors to keep healthcare costs down, which may limit the adoption of new technologies, including our products. In some jurisdictions, commercial use of our products may not be covered by governmental or commercial third-party payors for health care services and may never be covered. In addition, the costs and expenses incurred by the blood center related to donor blood are typically included in the price that the blood center charges a hospital for a unit of blood. Even after blood components treated with our products are approved for reimbursement by governmental or commercial third-party payors, the costs and expenses specific to the INTERCEPT Blood System will not be directly reimbursed, but instead may be incorporated within the reimbursement structure for medical procedures and/or products at the site of patient care. Governmental or third-party payors may change reimbursement rates, year-over-year, or in reaction to submitted claims for reimbursement of costs and expenses related to blood components treated with INTERCEPT. If the costs to the hospital for INTERCEPT processed blood products cannot be easily, readily, or fully incorporated into the existing reimbursement structure, or if reimbursement rates are insufficient or decreased in any given year for blood components treated with INTERCEPT, hospital billing and/or reimbursement for these products could be impacted, thus negatively impacting hospitals’ acceptance and uptake of our products. In addition, even if we are able to achieve market acceptance in the U.S. or newly commercialized markets, we have provided and may in the future provide adoption incentives which may negatively impact our reported sales.

We are exposed to risks associated with the highly concentrated market for the INTERCEPT Blood System.

The market for the INTERCEPT Blood System is highly concentrated with few customers, including often-dominant regional or national blood collection entities. Failure to effectively market, promote, distribute, price or sell our products to any of these customers could significantly delay or even diminish potential product revenue in those geographies. Moreover, the market for pathogen reduction systems in the U.S. is highly concentrated and dominated by a small number of blood collection organizations. In the U.S., the American Red Cross represents the largest single portion of the blood collection market. Our ability to gain and maintain significant market penetration in the U.S. is largely dependent on utilization of INTERCEPT and distribution of INTERCEPT-treated blood components by the American Red Cross. The American Red Cross is a large organization. Given the large relative size of the American Red Cross, our resources may be inadequate to fulfill the American Red Cross’ and other customers’ demands, which could result in a loss of product revenues or customer contracts, or both. Furthermore, should the American Red Cross order our products on an inconsistent basis, either by increasing or reducing overall utilization of the INTERCEPT Blood System or by building or depleting inventory levels they hold, our results of operations will be difficult to predict and may fall short of investor expectations.

In many countries in Western Europe and in Japan, various national blood transfusion services or Red Cross organizations collect, store and distribute virtually all of their respective nations’ blood and blood components supply. In Europe, the largest markets for our products are in Germany, France, and England. In Germany, decisions on product adoption are made on a regional or even blood center-by-blood center basis, but depend on both local approvals and centralized regulatory approvals from the Paul Ehrlich Institute, or PEI. Obtaining these approvals requires support and coordination from local blood centers, and may take a significant period of time to obtain, if ever. Product specifications that receive marketing authorization from the PEI may differ from product specifications that have been adopted in other parts of the EU and other third countries where we rely on CE Certificates of Conformity and the CE Mark, thereby necessitating market specific modifications to the commercial product, which may not be economical or technically feasible for us. Following the inclusion of pathogen-inactivated platelets for national reimbursement by the German Institute for the Hospital Remuneration System as of January 1, 2018, German customers who do not currently have an approved marketing authorization application, or MAA, will first need to obtain one before using our products. The review period for a new MAA can be 12 months or longer following submission and we cannot assure that any of the potential German customers submitting a new MAA will obtain it. We have invested in substantial commercial resources in Germany. Without approvals of MAA applications obtained by potential

26

German customers, our ability to successfully commercialize INTERCEPT in Germany will be negatively impacted, which may adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition and we may never realize a return on the investments we have made building out our commercial team in Germany. In addition, the reimbursement awarded to INTERCEPT in Germany may not be considered by German blood centers as attractive enough to implement pathogen reduction or cover the entirety of their blood center platelet collections which may in turn limit the market acceptance in Germany. Similar to the U.S., German blood centers will need to successfully market and sell to their hospital customers and understand and assist with the steps that are needed at the hospital level in Germany to administer pathogen-reduced platelets.

While we have entered into agreements with Établissement Français du Sang, or EFS, to supply illuminators and platelet and plasma disposable kits and maintenance services for illuminators to EFS, we cannot provide any assurance that the national deployment of the platelet system in France will be sustainable or that we will be able to secure any contracts subsequent to our existing contract with EFS. If we are unable to continue to successfully support EFS’ national adoption of the platelet system, EFS’ use of the plasma system, our business, results of operations and financial condition may be adversely impacted. Our contracts with EFS do not contain purchase volume commitments and as such, we may see variability in purchase levels or an altogether cessation. In addition, we understand that EFS is inspecting and testing samples of each lot that it purchases from us prior to accepting the products shipped to fulfill orders. We have little insight into the time to test, testing conditions or ultimate results. Other customers may require similar conditions of purchase. Testing may have a negative impact on our ability to recognize product revenue either due to the time it takes to test and approve the release of a shipment or if the customer experiences problems with testing or if testing results are outside of the customer acceptance criteria.

In Japan, the Japanese Red Cross controls a significant majority of blood transfusions and exerts a high degree of influence on the adoption and use of blood safety measures in Japan. The Japanese Red Cross has been reviewing preclinical and clinical data on pathogen reduction of blood over a number of years and has yet to make a formal determination to adopt any pathogen reduction approach. Before the Japanese Red Cross would consider our products, we understand that we may need to commit to making certain product configuration changes, which are currently under development but may not be economically or technologically feasible for us to accomplish.

Significant increases in demand may occur given the concentrated nature of many of the largest potential customers and the potential for a mandate by public health agencies to adopt pathogen reduction technologies. Should those customers choose to adopt and standardize their production on the INTERCEPT Blood System or be required to adopt and standardize on the INTERCEPT Blood System, our ability to meet associated increases in demand will likely be constrained due to a variety of factors, including production capacity at approved manufacturing sites, supply issues, manufacturing disruptions, availability of disposable kits manufactured from the obsolete plastic materials in jurisdictions that have not approved the use of alternate plastics for our disposable kits, or other obsolescence of parts, among others. If we encounter sustained growth or accelerated growth, our production capacity may be strained, at least temporarily or should we encounter disruptions, supply shortages, or shipping delays, we may have to allocate available products to customers, which could negatively impact our business and reputation or cause those customers to adopt competing products.

We may be unable to develop and maintain an effective and qualified U.S.-based commercial organization or educate blood centers, clinicians and hospital personnel. As a result, we may not be able to successfully educate the market on the value of pathogen reduction or commercialize our products in the U.S.

Successfully commercializing our products in the U.S. has taken more time than anticipated and has required us to continue to invest in commercialization efforts to build and maintain relationships, additional routine-use data and trust from the industry. We continue to need to attract, retain, train and support sales, marketing and scientific and hospital affairs personnel and other commercial talent. For example, we still need to attract and retain hospital affairs professionals to help educate hospitals and physicians on our products, clinical trial history and publications. Hospital affairs professionals are highly educated and trained professionals and the hiring and employment market for hospital affairs professionals is highly competitive. As such, we need to commit significant additional management and other resources in order to maintain and potentially expand our hospital affairs team and sales and marketing functions. We may be unable to develop and maintain adequate hospital affairs, sales and marketing capabilities for the U.S. market and we also may not be able to devote sufficient resources to the advertising, promotion and sales efforts for the platelet, plasma or cryoprecipitation systems in the U.S. The current labor shortage in the U.S. and in many countries where we have commercialized our products has exacerbated the challenge of attracting and retaining these personnel. In any event, if we are unable to develop and maintain an effective and qualified U.S. based commercial organization in a timely manner or at all, we may fail to realize the full sales potential of our commercial products in the U.S. which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospectus.

We have very limited experience selling directly to hospitals or expertise complying with regulations governing finished biologics, and our inability to successfully commercialize the INTERCEPT Blood System for cryoprecipitation in the U.S. would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We have very limited experience selling directly to hospitals nor do we have prior experience or expertise complying with regulations governing finished biologics. The introduction of new models of doing business require extensive training of our personnel and may lengthen the time it takes for this business unit to be fully operational. In this regard, our blood center customers may view the sale of biologics directly to hospitals as a competitive threat, which may adversely affect our customer relationships, could negatively impact

27

our business prospects and could result in loss of business and revenue. Conversely, we may also sell the disposable kits directly to blood centers for the manufacture of IFC for their own account or for hospitals with whom they already have contracts in place. As a result, we may be directly competing with these blood centers for the sale of IFC. These blood centers have more experience and existing contracts with hospitals and may be able to offer synergies that we cannot, each of which may negatively impact our ability to compete successfully.

In addition, until we are successful in selling INTERCEPT Blood System for Cryoprecipitation kits to blood centers or affiliate organizations or hospitals with in-house blood centers, our ability to directly commercialize finished IFC throughout the U.S. is dependent on the approval of manufacturing site BLAs by the FDA. While certain sites have received their BLAs, we cannot be sure that all of the sites will receive such authorizations in a timely manner, if at all. In addition, in order to market and sell finished IFC to hospital customers throughout the U.S., we may need to identify and validate additional manufacturing partners or sell INTERCEPT Blood System for Cryoprecipitation kits to blood centers or affiliate organizations or hospitals with in-house blood centers. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully negotiate additional agreements with manufacturing partners on terms that are acceptable to us. IFC is a product derived from our INTERCEPT Blood System for plasma. As such, any supply disruptions or failures that could impact our plasma system will have a direct negative impact on the production of IFC. Such supply disruptions could negatively impact our ability to fulfill customer orders, which will have an adverse effect on our business reputation and the successful introduction and adoption of our new products. Further, unless or until we negotiate committed volume purchase agreements with our customers, we can provide no assurance that sales of IFC product will occur in a consistent or predictable manner.

If we are unable to successfully market the INTERCEPT Blood System for cryoprecipitation to hospitals or comply with unique regulations governing finished biologics, our ability to monetize and deliver the INTERCEPT Blood System for cryoprecipitation will be negatively impacted which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In addition, we may never achieve market acceptance and adoption of IFC by U.S. hospitals to generate product revenue sufficient to cover its costs.

We may be liable and we may need to withdraw our products from the market if our products harm people. We may be liable if an accident occurs in our controlled use of hazardous materials. Our insurance coverage may be inadequate to offset losses we may incur.

We are exposed to potential liability risks inherent in the testing and marketing of medical devices and biologic products. We may be liable if any of our products cause injury, illness or death. Although we complete preclinical and clinical safety testing prior to marketing our products, there may be harmful effects caused by our products that we are unable to identify in preclinical or clinical testing. In particular, unforeseen, rare reactions or adverse side effects related to long-term use of our products may not be observed until the products are in widespread commercial use. Because of the limited duration and number of patients receiving blood components treated with the INTERCEPT Blood System products in clinical trials, it is possible that harmful effects of our products not observed in preclinical and clinical testing could be discovered after a marketing approval, or CE Certificate of Conformity has been received or after affixing the CE Mark to our products. For example, in cases where we have obtained regulatory approval or have affixed the CE Mark to our products, we have demonstrated pathogen reduction to specified levels based on well-established tests. However, there is no way to determine, after treatment by our products, whether our products have completely inactivated all of the pathogens that may be present in blood components. In addition, even if our products inactivate all pathogens in a blood product, it is often difficult to determine if pathogens are introduced after treatment with INTERCEPT due to blood center or hospital mishandling, shipping or other possibilities. For example, we have recently learned of instances where, following treatment with INTERCEPT, mishandling of the treated blood components has introduced environmental bacterium. We must help our blood center customers to remain or increase their vigilance in adopting best practices regarding blood component handling. Failure to adequately address this risk may call into question the efficacy of using pathogen reduction. There is also no way to determine whether any residual amount of a pathogen remains in the blood component treated by our products and there is no way to exclude that such residual amount would be enough to cause disease in the transfused patient or was a result of a potential defect or lack of efficacy of our products. We could be subject to a claim from a patient that tests positive, even though that patient did not contract a disease. In addition, should personnel at clinical study sites or ultimately, potential customers, be harmed by amustaline, or believe they have been or could be harmed by amustaline, our insurance coverage may be insufficient to provide coverage for any related potential liabilities. Amustaline is considered a potent chemical and is the active compound of our red blood cell system.

Although, we maintain an active safety monitoring platform with trained personnel, we cannot predict when, if ever, a safety event will occur or be able to timely or satisfactorily determine whether or not our product was a cause. We maintain product liability insurance, but do not know whether the insurance will provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our products.

Our research and development activities involve the controlled use of hazardous materials, including certain hazardous chemicals, radioactive materials and infectious pathogens, such as HIV and hepatitis viruses. Although we believe that our safety procedures for handling and disposing of hazardous materials are adequate and comply with regulatory requirements, we cannot eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury. If an accident occurs, we could be held liable for any damages that result.

28

A recall of our products, either voluntarily or at the direction of the FDA, the competent authorities of an EU Member State, or another governmental authority, including foreign regulatory authority or the discovery of serious safety issues with our products that leads to corrective actions, could have a significant adverse impact on us.

Any adverse event involving our products, whether in the U.S. or abroad, could result in future voluntary corrective actions, such as recalls or customer notifications, or agency action, such as inspection, mandatory recall or other enforcement action. Any corrective action, whether voluntary or involuntary, as well as defending ourselves in a lawsuit, will require the dedication of our time and capital, distract management from operating our business and may harm our reputation and financial results.

Under the FDA’s reporting regulations, we are required to report to the FDA any incident in which our products may have caused or contributed to a death or serious injury or in which our product malfunctioned and, if the malfunction were to recur, would likely cause or contribute to death or serious injury. Regulatory agencies in other countries have similar authority to recall devices because of material deficiencies or defects in design or manufacture that could endanger health. We may initiate a product recall under our own initiative if any material deficiency in our product is found, such as a component failure, malfunctions, manufacturing errors, design or labeling defects or other deficiencies and issues, or withdraw a product to improve device performance or for other reasons. If we do not adequately address problems associated with our products, we may face additional regulatory enforcement action, including FDA warning letters, product seizure, injunctions, administrative penalties, or civil or criminal fines. Similar actions and obligations may be imposed by the competent authorities of an EU Member State, or a foreign regulatory authority.

We may also be required to bear other costs or take other actions that may have a negative impact on our sales as well as face significant adverse publicity or regulatory consequences, which could harm our business, including our ability to market our products in the future. Such events could impair our ability to supply our products in a cost-effective and timely manner in order to meet our customers’ demands.

If our competitors develop products superior to ours, market their products more effectively, or receive regulatory approval or certification before our products, our commercial opportunities could be reduced or be eliminated.

We expect our products will continue to encounter significant competition. The INTERCEPT Blood System products compete with other approaches to blood safety currently in use and may compete with future products that may be developed by others. Our success depends in part on our ability to respond quickly to customer and prospective customer needs, successfully receive and maintain regulatory approvals, and adapt to medical and technological changes brought about by the development and introduction of new products. Competitors’ products or technologies may make our products obsolete or non-competitive. In addition, competitors or potential competitors may have substantially greater financial and other resources than we have. If competitive pathogen reduction products experience significant problems, customers and potential customers may question the safety and efficacy of all pathogen reduction technologies, including the INTERCEPT Blood System. Such questions and concerns may impair our ability to market and sell the INTERCEPT Blood System.

Several companies have, or are developing, technologies that are, or in the future may be, the basis for products that will directly compete with or reduce the market for our pathogen reduction systems. A number of companies are specifically focusing on alternative strategies for pathogen reduction in platelets and plasma. These alternative strategies may be more effective in reducing certain types of pathogens from blood products, including certain non-lipid-enveloped viruses, such as hepatitis A and E viruses or human parvovirus B-19, which our products have not demonstrated an ability to inactivate or have not demonstrated a high level of inactivation. If our customers determine that competitor’s products inactivate a broader range of pathogens that are of particular interest to the transfusion medicine community, market adoption of our platelet and plasma products may be adversely impacted. In addition, customers and prospective customers may believe that our competitors’ products are safer, more cost effective or easier to implement and incorporate into existing blood processing procedures than INTERCEPT Blood System products. Moreover, regulatory agencies may mandate use of competing products which would limit our ability to sell our products in those markets.

In addition, while we believe that IFC has many advantages over competitors, traditional cryoprecipitate and fibrinogen concentrates are well established within hospital use. Even if we are able to generate compelling data regarding the use of IFC over other products or traditional cryoprecipitate, hospitals may not perceive the advantage of IFC over the competing products and we may be ineffective in selling biological agents directly to hospitals or be unable to demonstrate the economic or patient advantages to customers relative to the competitors. Further, competitors may have more experience marketing and selling products directly to hospitals.

Our platelet and plasma products and product candidates are not compatible with some collection, production and storage methods or combinations thereof. Further, blood centers using INTERCEPT must have access to those certain devices, blood bags, assays or platelet additive solutions that are compatible with our products.

The equipment and materials used to collect platelets vary by manufacturer and by geographic region. Platelets may be collected from a single donor by apheresis using an automated collection machine. Apheresis devices currently used in the U.S. and European markets differ, among other characteristics, in their ability to collect platelets in reduced volumes of plasma. Platelet collection device manufacturers may need to modify device collection parameters or software before a prospective customer could use INTERCEPT. If these manufacturers are not cooperative or are resistant to assist their customers or do not assist with making such modifications, the

29

potential market for our products may be limited. Platelet concentrates may also be prepared from whole blood by pooling together platelets from multiple donors. There are two commonly used methods for preparing whole blood platelets: the buffy coat method, which is used extensively in Europe, and the pooled random donor method, which is used in the U.S. Our platelet system is designed to work with platelets collected and stored in storage solutions, called InterSol and SSP+, and for platelets suspended in 100% plasma. Fresenius is the exclusive manufacturer of InterSol and MacoPharma of SSP+, both widely-used PAS. Many of our customers and prospective customers use InterSol or SSP+ in connection with INTERCEPT treatment. Similarly, some of our customers combine multiple platelet or plasma components before treating the combined product with INTERCEPT. Further, blood centers using INTERCEPT must have access to those certain devices, blood bags, assays or platelet additive solutions that are compatible with our products. We have recently learned of concerns about manufacturers’ ability to provide an uninterrupted supply of PAS solutions to our blood center customers. Should such a supply disruption occur, our customer’s ability to treat platelets using INTERCEPT may be negatively impacted or may require us to secure approval for and supply PAS, for which we do not currently have regulatory approval.

We understand that several third-party manufacturers of pooling sets are planning to discontinue producing pooling sets due to the requirement to comply under the new European Union Regulation (EU) 2017/745, the Medical Device Regulation, or MDR. Our customers’ ability to use our INTERCEPT products may be impaired should manufacturers of those products cease production or if our customers are unable to find an alternate pooling set meeting their quality and production requirement for their production of INTERECEPT-treated blood components. Moreover, in order to alleviate any disruption to our customers, we have chosen to stockpile pooling sets, which required use of capital for a marginally profitable non-core product. In addition, should other manufacturers of collection devices, compatible assays and blood bags, pooling sets or platelet additive solutions fail to obtain or maintain regulatory approval or a CE Certificate of Conformity necessary for affixing the CE Mark to our product under the MDR, experience unexpected production disruption, or decide to cease distribution of those respective products to customers and prospective customers, or prohibitively increase costs, our ability to sell the INTERCEPT Blood System may be impaired and acceptance within the marketplace could be harmed.

In order to address the entire market in the U.S., Japan, and potentially elsewhere, we will need to develop and test additional configurations of the platelet system. For example, in the U.S., we understand a significant number of platelet concentrates are derived from larger volumes collected from apheresis donors split into three therapeutic transfusable doses. While we have trained many customers to break down such donations to volumes and doses compatible with our products other prospective customers may not want to modify their operating practices and may therefore choose alternative compliant practices. In order to address these customers, we would need to develop future configurations of the platelet system to treat platelet donations with such processing parameters, which is not in our current plans. We estimate that the majority of platelets used in the U.S. are collected by apheresis, though a significant minority is prepared from pooled random donor platelets derived from whole blood collections. In addition, many blood centers may view pooled random donor platelets treated with INTERCEPT as an economically optimal approach. In order to gain regulatory approvals for a pathogen reduction system compatible with triple dose collections, and random donor platelets, we will need to perform additional product development and testing, including additional clinical trials. In the U.S, our approved labels for the platelet system from the FDA limit our current approvals to certain platelet collection platforms and a particular storage solution for the particular collection platform. For instance, our approved claims permit apheresis collection of platelets on the Fresenius Amicus device while stored in an additive solution or for apheresis collection of platelets collected on the Terumo Trima device and stored in 100% plasma. While we are seeking to generate acceptable data for Amicus collected platelets stored in 100% plasma, we cannot assure you that the data will be acceptable to the FDA or that we will receive timely approval, if ever. We may be required to provide the FDA with data for each permutation for which blood banking treatment practices exist which may be time consuming, costly and limit the potential size of the U.S. market that can use our products. In addition, given that there is some loss of platelets using our product, blood centers may need to increase collection volumes in order to use our product. Given the current blood component shortage, increased collection volumes may not be achievable or use of INTERCEPT may be considered less efficient than other operating practices, particularly in regions such as the U.S. where we do not maintain a seven day platelet storage claim. Similarly, to achieve market acceptance in certain geographies, we may be required to design, develop and test new product configurations for the platelet and plasma systems. In addition, we will need to continue to generate acceptable data in order to conform with the evolving collection practices such as automated whole-blood collection. If we are unable to conform to evolving collection practices our ability to address those portions of the market may be compromised. We may also need to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of our platelet system using a variety of configurations before our platelet system would be approved for such configurations. In any event, any failures or delays in obtaining FDA, CE Certificates of Conformity and other regulatory approvals for any new configurations would adversely affect our ability to introduce new or enhanced products in a timely manner, which in turn could materially harm our product revenue and prospects for potential future profitability.

Clinical trials are costly and time consuming, may take longer than we expect or may not be completed at all, and their outcomes are uncertain. A failure to generate data in clinical trials to support expanded label claims or to support marketing approvals or certification for our product candidates could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We are currently conducting multiple clinical trials for our products and product candidates and plan to commence additional clinical trials of our products and product candidates in the future. We cannot be certain that the design or conduct of, or data collected from, these trials will be sufficient to support FDA, a CE Certificate of Conformity prior to affixing a CE Mark or any other regulatory

30

approvals outside the U.S. If we fail to produce positive results in our ongoing or planned clinical trials, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for our products and our product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects, would be materially adversely affected. We do not know whether we will begin or complete clinical trials on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays in obtaining regulatory approval to commence a study, delays in reaching agreement on acceptable clinical study agreement terms with prospective clinical sites, delays in obtaining institutional review board, ministry of health or ethics committee approval to conduct a study at a prospective clinical site, delays in recruiting subjects to participate in a study, delays in the conduct of the clinical trial by personnel at the clinical site or due to our inability to actively and timely monitor clinical trial sites because of travel restrictions, extreme weather or other natural forces, terrorist activity or general concerns over employee safety. In this regard, we have experienced delays in our RedeS and ReCePI studies related to the COVID-19 pandemic and other factors. For example, some clinical sites for the RedeS study are located in areas that are subject to disruption by severe weather such as flooding, hurricanes or other natural forces such as earthquakes, which have delayed enrollment and progress of the RedeS study in the past. In addition, our ReCePI study in complex cardiovascular surgery patients had been slower to enroll due to a variety of factors including low frequency of administering red blood cells to the patient population and reticence to participate in research studies. If we are unable to enroll a sufficient number of patients from the ReCePI study to generate the data needed for licensure, we will need to reach agreement with the FDA on a new pathway to generate sufficient data for the red blood cell system, including the potential for additional Phase 3 clinical trials beyond what is currently contemplated with the RedeS and ReCePI studies. In any event, we cannot be certain that further delays in the RedeS study, the ReCePI study or other clinical trials will not occur.

Criteria for regulatory approval in blood safety indications are evolving, reflecting competitive advances in the standard of care against which new product candidates are judged, as well as changing market needs and reimbursement levels. Clinical trial design, including enrollment criteria, endpoints and anticipated label claims are thus subject to change, even if original objectives are being met. As a result, we do not know whether any clinical trial will result in marketable products. Typically, there is a high rate of failure for product candidates in preclinical studies and clinical trials and products emerging from any successful trial may not reach the market for several years.

Enrollment criteria for certain of our clinical trials may be quite narrow, further delaying the clinical trial process. For instance, clinical trials previously conducted using INTERCEPT-treated plasma for patients with thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura lasted approximately four years due in part to the difficulties associated with enrolling qualified patients. In addition, enrollment criteria impacted the speed with which we were able to enroll patients in our European Phase 3 red blood cell system trial in chronic anemia patients, and may impact other studies. Given the need to phenotypically match donations and patients and the existing burden of managing the production and supply to sickle-cell anemia patients, donor recruitment in chronic anemia patients may be difficult or impractical, which may be costly or significantly delay or preclude our ability to obtain any FDA approval of our red blood cell system.

We cannot rely on interim results of trials to predict their final results, and acceptable results in early trials might not be repeated in later and larger clinical trials or in the results of routine use. Any trial may fail to produce results satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, preclinical and clinical data can be interpreted in different ways, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. Negative or inconclusive results from a preclinical study or clinical trial, or adverse medical events during a clinical trial could cause a preclinical study or clinical trial to be repeated, require other studies to be performed or cause a program to be terminated, even if other studies or trials relating to a program are successful.

We have conducted many toxicology studies to demonstrate the safety of the platelet and plasma systems, and we have conducted and plan to conduct toxicology studies for the red blood cell system throughout the product development process. At any time, the FDA and other regulatory authorities or Notified Bodies may require further toxicology or other studies to further demonstrate our products’ safety, which could delay or preclude regulatory approval and commercialization. Furthermore, any major changes to components used in our products or configuration changes to our products may require additional toxicology studies which may not produce acceptable results. Beyond toxicology studies, changes to our products or the manufacturing process of our products may require additional aging and stability data in order to satisfy regulators and maintain historical label claims. For instance, despite having 24 month aging for our products in many territories around the world, the FDA has limited the shelf life of our platelet product to six months for any platelet kit produced using a new solvent for the manufacture of a component. In addition, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may alter guidance at any time as to what constitutes acceptable clinical trial endpoints or trial design, which may necessitate a redesign of our product or proposed clinical trials and cause us to incur substantial additional expense or time in attempting to gain regulatory approval. Regulatory agencies weigh the potential risks of using our pathogen reduction products against the incremental benefits, which may be difficult or impossible to quantify.

If any additional product candidates receive approval for commercial sale in the U.S., or if we obtain approval for expanded label claims for the platelet system or plasma system, the FDA may require one or more post-approval clinical or in vitro studies as a condition of approval, such as the post-approval clinical study that we completed in connection with the approval of the platelet system and the additional post-approval study that we are required to conduct on recovery and survival of platelets suspended in 100% plasma in connection with the expanded label claim that we received for the platelet system. In addition, the FDA has required that we successfully complete a recovery and survival study of platelets suspended in platelet additive solutions stored at five days. Each of these studies and

31

any additional studies that the FDA may require could involve significant expense, may require us to secure adequate funding to complete and may not be successful. In addition, enrollment of post-marketing studies may be difficult to complete timely if customers of blood centers are reluctant to accept conventional, non-INTERCEPT-treated products once INTERCEPT products become available to them. Other regulatory authorities or Notified Bodies outside of the U.S. may also require post-marketing studies. Failure to successfully complete post-marketing studies may place certain restrictions on the use of our products or regulators could suspend or revoke our approvals.

The red blood cell system is currently in development and may never receive any marketing approvals or CE Certificates of Conformity.

While we are in the process of submitting an application for a CE Certificate of Conformity prior to affixing a CE Mark to our red blood cell system, it has not been approved for marketing or commercialized anywhere in the world. Significant development and financial resources will be required to progress the red blood cell system into a commercially viable product and to obtain the necessary CE Certificate of Conformity and other regulatory approvals for the product. For instance, regulators or Notified Bodies may require clinical data for our red blood cell system under each collection and processing method using various additive or storage solutions before they would grant approval for any such configuration. The clinical data we have generated thus far and submitted for a Certificate of Conformity does not support multiple configurations of collection processes, storage solutions and kits. If we are required to and are ultimately unable to collect data under each configuration or if we limit our pursuit of certain configurations over others, our market opportunity may be limited. In any event, any failure or further delays in completing the development activities for the red blood cell system would prevent or continue to delay its commercialization, which would materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, growth prospects and potential future market adoption of any of our products, including the red blood cell system.

In some instances, we are relying on contract research organizations and other third parties to assist us in designing, managing, monitoring and otherwise carrying out our clinical trials and development activities for the red blood cell system. We do not control these third parties and, as a result, they may not treat our activities as their highest priority, or in the manner in which we would prefer, which could result in delays, inefficient use of our resources and could distract personnel from other activities. Additionally, if we, our contract research organizations, other third parties assisting us or our study sites fail to comply with applicable good clinical practices, the clinical data generated in our trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or foreign regulatory agencies or Notified Bodies may require us to perform additional clinical trials before delivering a CE Certificate of Conformity or approving the red blood cell system for commercialization. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, regulatory agencies will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with good clinical practices. We must also be able to demonstrate stability of our active compounds manufactured under the FDA’s cGMP regulations and similar requirements outside of the U.S. which meets release specifications. If we are unable to demonstrate an ability to manufacture according to our specifications under cGMP or similar requirements outside of the U.S. with acceptable stability data, we may be unable to satisfy regulatory questions and requirements which could prevent or delay the potential approval of or our ability to commercialize the red blood cell system. In addition, existing lots of these red blood cell compounds manufactured under cGMP may be dispositioned by regulators or ourselves as unsuitable for clinical use which would impact our ability to produce INTERCEPT-treated red blood cells for ongoing and future clinical trials and may require changes to the manufacturing process of our red blood cell compounds or new production of the compounds, all of which would be costly and time consuming and impact our ability to perform under our BARDA contract.

In 2003, we terminated Phase 3 clinical trials evaluating a prior generation of the red blood cell system in acute and chronic anemia patients. The trials were terminated due to the detection of antibody reactivity to INTERCEPT-treated red blood cells in two patients in the 2003 chronic anemia trial. Although the antibody reactivity was not associated with any adverse events, we developed process changes designed to diminish the likelihood of antibody reactivity in red blood cells treated with our modified process. While we successfully completed the European Phase 3 acute anemia clinical trial and the European Phase 3 chronic anemia clinical trial, we cannot assure you that the adverse events observed in the terminated 2003 Phase 3 clinical trials of our earlier red blood cell system will not be observed in current and potential future clinical trials using our modified process. We also cannot assure you that patients receiving INTERCEPT-treated red blood cells will not develop allergic reactions to the transfusion.

We will need to successfully conduct and complete license enabling Phase 3 clinical trials in the U.S. and to generate sufficient chronic anemia data for licensure. Given the need to phenotypically match donations and patients and the existing burden of managing the production and supply to sickle-cell anemia patients, donor recruitment in chronic anemia patients may be difficult or impractical, which could significantly delay or preclude our ability to obtain any FDA approval of our red blood cell system. In any event, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete these prerequisite Phase 3 clinical trials or otherwise generate sufficient Phase 3 clinical data. In part, we will seek to introduce supplemental clinical data we obtained from European clinical trials, though we cannot assure you that we will be able to demonstrate comparability or that the FDA will allow supplemental clinical European data. If treatment emergent antibody reactions associated with hemolysis are observed in any of our Phase 3 trials, the FDA will require us to place a clinical hold and we will need to investigate the underlying cause. Such investigations may be difficult for us to assess imputability which may lead to a complete halt of the clinical trial, may irreparably harm our red blood cell product’s reputation and may force us to suspend or terminate development activities related to the red blood cell system in the U.S., which would have a material adverse effect

32

on our business and business prospects. To date, several S-303 antibody events without evidence of hemolysis have been detected in the RedeS and ReCePI studies. We do not yet know if the S-303 antibody events were in the control or test arm, and we cannot provide any assurance that additional S-303 antibody events will not occur, or if they do occur, will not be clinically significant.

We completed our European Phase 3 clinical trials of our red blood cell system for acute anemia patients and separately for chronic anemia patients. We filed our application for a CE Certificate of Conformity related to the red blood cell system in December 2018 under the Medical Device Directive, or MDD, and in June 2021, we completed the resubmission of our application under the new MDR. The Notified Body has reviewed all four modules of our application for CE Certificate of Conformity of the red blood cell system, though delays can occur for multiple reasons, including due to clock stops for questions on our application for a CE Certificate of Conformity or work load for the Notified Body. Furthermore, the Dutch Medicines Evaluation Board (CBG), the competent authority for our red blood cell product, has reviewed the relevant sections of our submission and have asked numerous questions. We will need to satisfactorily respond to those questions timely and with satisfactory data before our application will be considered for approval. We cannot predict when, if ever, we will be able to answer those questions and supply the required data or whether a decision concerning certification will occur. In addition, we are currently in discussions with our sole supplier of key components of the red blood cell system with respect to a dispute over its willingness to continue to supply us with such components, without changes, throughout the application process for our CE Certificate of Conformity. Because our CE Certificate of Conformity application under the new MDR for the red blood cell system is specific to this supplier’s existing manufacturing site and manufacturing processes, if we are unable to reach satisfactory resolution of this dispute, or if this supplier is otherwise unable or unwilling to supply us with these components using its existing manufacturing site and manufacturing processes, any decision on our CE Certificate of Conformity application would be delayed beyond our current expectations, and we may be required to engage and validate a new supplier for these components, which would substantially delay the timing of a decision on our CE Certificate of Conformity application, perhaps indefinitely. Accordingly, the timing of the ultimate decision on our CE Certificate of Conformity application and the related timing at which we may be able to affix the CE Mark to our product, remains subject to the satisfactory resolution of this dispute, including our current supplier’s willingness to continue to supply us with these components using its existing manufacturing site and manufacturing processes throughout our CE Certificate of Conformity application and afterwards, if obtained, or alternatively, the engagement and validation of a new supplier of these key components, and in any event will be based on questions about our application for a CE Certificate of Conformity and the timing of the responses, and we do not otherwise expect a related decision will occur for at least another 12 months, if ever. Moreover, we do not yet know whether the data generated from our European Phase 3 clinical trials will be sufficient to support a CE Certificate of Conformity, even if limited to a target patient population having chronic anemia. Furthermore, we do not yet know if the clinical data we have generated will be sufficient to satisfy the stricter standards imposed by the MDR. If such data is deemed insufficient, we may need to generate additional safety data in clinical trials to satisfy the MDR standards. We will likely need to generate additional safety and efficacy data in order to achieve broad label claim or market acceptance. In addition, the European Phase 3 clinical trials in acute, and separately, chronic anemia patients, may need to be supplemented by additional, successful Phase 3 clinical trials for approval in certain countries. These data may need to be supplemented by additional, successful Phase 3 clinical trials for approval in certain countries. If such additional Phase 3 clinical trials are required, they would likely need to demonstrate non-inferiority of INTERCEPT red blood cells compared to conventional red blood cells and the significantly lower lifespan for INTERCEPT red blood cells compared to conventional red blood cells may limit our ability to obtain any regulatory approvals or certification in certain countries for the red blood cell system. A number of trial design issues that could impact efficacy, regulatory approval, certification and market acceptance will need to be resolved prior to the initiation of further clinical trials.

If we are unsuccessful in advancing the red blood cell system through clinical trials, resolving process and product design issues, securing commercial manufacturing for sufficient volumes or in obtaining subsequent regulatory approvals or certification and acceptable reimbursement rates, we may never realize a return on our R&D expenses incurred to date for the red blood cell system program. Regulatory delays can also materially impact our product development costs. When we experience delays in testing, conducting trials or approvals or certification, our product development costs will increase, which may exceed the budgets or timeframe under our BARDA agreement or which costs may otherwise not be reimbursable to us under the BARDA agreement. Even if we were to successfully complete and receive approval or certification for our red blood cell system, potential blood center customers may object to working with a potent chemical, like amustaline, the active compound in the red blood cell system, or may require modifications to automate the process, which would result in additional development costs, any of which could limit any market acceptance of the red blood cell system. If the red blood cell system were to face such objections from potential customers, we may choose to pay for capital assets, specialized equipment or personnel for the blood center, which would have a negative impact on any potential contribution margin from red blood cell system sales. Moreover, customers may not accept the manual configuration of the product and require us to develop a more operationally scalable version of the system which would be expensive and may not be successful. Additionally, the use of the red blood cell system may result in some processing loss of red blood cells. If the loss of red blood cells leads to increased costs, or the perception of increased costs for potential customers, or potential customers believe that the loss of red blood cells reduces the efficacy of the transfusion unit, or our process requires changes in blood center or clinical regimens, potential customers may not adopt our red blood cell system, even if approved for commercial sale.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval, CE Certificates of Conformity, and Oversight, and Other Legal Compliance Matters

33

Our company, our products, and blood products treated with the INTERCEPT Blood System are subject to extensive regulation by domestic authorities, foreign authorities and Notified Bodies.

Our products, both those sold commercially and those under development are subject to extensive and rigorous regulation by local, state and federal regulatory authorities in the U.S. and by foreign regulatory bodies and Notified Bodies. Our products must satisfy rigorous standards of safety and efficacy and we must adhere to quality standards regarding manufacturing and customer-facing business processes in order for the FDA and international regulatory authorities and Notified Bodies to approve them for commercial use. For our product candidates, we must provide the FDA and international regulatory authorities and Notified Bodies with preclinical, clinical and manufacturing data demonstrating that our products are safe, effective and in compliance with government regulations before the products can be approved for commercial sale. The process of obtaining required regulatory approvals and certifications is expensive, uncertain and typically takes a number of years. We may continue to encounter significant delays or excessive costs in our efforts to secure necessary approvals, certifications or licenses, or we may not be successful at all. In addition, our labeling claims may not be consistent across markets. We have developed our products with the aim to standardize the volume of platelets treatable by our system, wherever possible, which may not be accepted by all regulators or customers, may require additional data to support approval or certifications or may not produce optimal transfusable blood components. For example, jurisdictions differ in the definition of what constitutes a transfusable unit of platelets and in certain jurisdictions, our approved label claims and the definition of a viable platelet unit for transfusion may allow for a significantly lower or higher platelet count per volume than certain jurisdictions may allow. This variability in platelet count per volume may result in differences in platelet quality once processed and stored using INTERCEPT, and if customers experience sub-optimal platelet quality following INTERCEPT treatment, they may limit their adoption of INTERCEPT or consider adoption of competing blood safety technologies over INTERCEPT.

Governments or regulatory authorities may impose new regulations or other changes or we may discover that we are subject to additional regulations that could further delay or preclude regulatory approval or certifications and subsequent adoption of our potential products. We cannot predict the adoption, implementation or impact of adverse governmental regulation that might arise from future legislative or administrative action.

Outside of the U.S., regulations vary by country, including the requirements for regulatory and marketing approvals, certifications or clearance, the time required for regulatory review and the sanctions imposed for violations. In addition to technical documentation supporting the certification and CE Marking of our product, countries outside the EU may require clinical data submissions, registration packages, import licenses or other documentation. Regulatory authorities in Japan, China, Taiwan, South Korea, Vietnam, Thailand, Singapore and elsewhere may require in-country clinical trial data, among other requirements, or that our products be widely adopted commercially in Europe and the U.S., or may delay such approval decisions until our products are more widely adopted. In addition to the regulatory requirements applicable to us and to our products, there are regulatory requirements in several countries around the world, including the U.S., Germany, Canada, Austria, Australia and other countries, applicable to prospective customers of INTERCEPT Blood System products and the blood centers that process and distribute blood and blood products. In those countries, blood centers and other customers are required to obtain approved license supplements from the appropriate regulatory authorities before making available blood products processed with our pathogen reduction systems to hospitals and transfusing physicians. Our customers may lack the resources or capability to obtain such regulatory approvals. Significant product changes or changes in the way customers use our products may require amendments or supplemental approvals to licenses already obtained. Blood centers that do submit applications, supplements or amendments for manufacturing and sale may face disapproval or delays in approval that could further delay or deter them from using our products. The regulatory impact on potential customers could slow or limit the potential sales of our products.

In March 2020, we received extensions of our CE Certificate of Conformity for the platelet and plasma systems to 2024 that was issued on the basis of the MDD. We submitted our CE Certificate of Conformity application for approval of the platelet system under the new MDR in November 2021 and subsequently completed our CE Certificate of Conformity submission for the plasma system under the new MDR, but cannot currently assure you that our products will timely meet the requirements of the new MDR prior to the expirations of our CE Certificate of Conformity that was issued on the basis of the MDD. Our failure to meet the requirements of the new MDR could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. We or our customers have received approval for the sale and/or use of INTERCEPT-treated platelets and plasma within Europe in France, Switzerland, Germany and Austria. However, we have recently learned that Swiss regulators will no longer accept CE Certificates of Conformity issued on the basis of the MDR for EU based medical devices on the basis of the mutual recognition agreement concluded between the parties. While we are currently in the process of completing the requirements to maintain regulatory approval of our products in Switzerland, we cannot assure you that we will be successful in doing so. In addition, we or our customers may also be required to conduct additional testing in order to obtain regulatory approval in countries that do not recognize the CE Mark as being adequate for commercializing the INTERCEPT Blood System in those countries. The level of additional product testing varies by country, but could be expensive or take a long time to complete. In addition, regulatory agencies are able to withdraw or suspend previously issued approvals due to changes in regulatory law, our inability to maintain compliance with regulations or other factors. In some countries, including several in Europe, we or our customers may be required to perform additional clinical studies or submit manufacturing and marketing applications in order to obtain regulatory approval. If we or our customers are unable to obtain or maintain regulatory approvals for the use and sale or continued sale and use of INTERCEPT-treated platelets or plasma, market adoption of our products

34

will be negatively affected and our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects would be materially and adversely impacted.

The advertising and promotion of medical devices in the EU is subject to the national laws of EU Member States applying the MDR, Directive 2006/114/EC concerning misleading and comparative advertising, and Directive 2005/29/EC on unfair commercial practices, as well as other national legislation of individual EU Member States governing the advertising and promotion of medical devices. EU Member State legislation may also restrict or impose limitations on our ability to advertise our products directly to the general public. In addition, voluntary EU and national Codes of Conduct provide guidelines on the advertising and promotion of our products to the general public and may impose limitations on our promotional activities with healthcare professionals.

Moreover, we may be required to conduct costly post-market testing and surveillance to monitor the safety or effectiveness of our products in the EU. We must comply with medical device reporting requirements, including the reporting of serious incidents including malfunctions related to our products and field safety corrective actions, as well as adverse events occurring during clinical investigations. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with our products, including unanticipated adverse events or adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, manufacturing problems, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements may result in changes to labeling, restrictions on such products or manufacturing processes, withdrawal of the products from the market, voluntary or mandatory recalls, a requirement to repair, replace or refund the cost of any medical device we manufacture or distribute, fines, suspension, variation or withdrawal of regulatory clearances, certifications or approvals, product seizures, injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties which would adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects.

As a condition to the initial FDA approval of the platelet system, we were required to submit data from a post-approval clinical study of the platelet system – a haemovigilance study to evaluate the incidence of acute lung injury following transfusion of INTERCEPT-treated platelets. While that post marketing study was successful, we are also required to conduct a post-approval recovery and survival clinical study in connection with the label expansion approval for the use of the platelet system to treat platelets suspended in 100% plasma as well as a recovery and survival study of platelets suspended in platelet additive solutions stored at five days. Successful enrollment and completion of these additional post-approval studies will require that we identify and contract with hospitals that have the desire and ability to participate and contribute to the study in a timely manner and who are willing to purchase INTERCEPT-treated platelets from our blood center customers, which we may be unable to do in a timely manner or at all. In addition, the FDA may also require us to commit to perform other lengthy post-marketing studies, for which we would have to expend significant additional resources, which could have an adverse effect on our financial condition and results of operations. In addition, there is a risk that post-approval studies will be unsuccessful or show results inconsistent with our previous studies. Should this happen, potential customers may delay or choose not to adopt the INTERCEPT Blood System and existing customers may cease use of the INTERCEPT Blood System. Failure to successfully complete post-marketing studies may place certain restrictions on the use of our products or regulators could suspend or revoke our approvals.

We are also required to comply with applicable FDA and other regulatory post-approval requirements relating to, among other things, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, record-keeping and reporting of safety and other information. In addition, our manufacturers and their facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and foreign regulatory authorities' requirements, including, in the U.S., ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP and current QSR requirements. We must also comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. For example, our promotional materials and training methods must comply with FDA and other applicable laws and regulations, including the prohibition of the promotion of unapproved, or off-label, use. If the FDA determines that our promotional materials or training constitutes promotion of an off-label use, it could request that we modify our training or promotional materials or subject us to regulatory or enforcement actions. It is also possible that other federal, state or foreign enforcement authorities might take action if they consider our promotional or training materials to constitute promotion of an off-label use, or a violation or any other federal or state law that applies to us, such as laws prohibiting false claims for reimbursement. In addition, our reputation could be damaged and adoption of the products could be impaired.

If a regulatory authority or Notified Body suspects or discovers problems with a product, such as serious incidents, adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility or the manufacturing process at the facility where the product is manufactured, or problems with the quality of product manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing, or labeling of a product, a regulatory authority may impose restrictions on use of that product, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. Our failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements could result in enforcement action by regulatory agencies, which may include any of the following sanctions:

•

adverse publicity, warning letters, fines, injunctions, seizure, consent decrees and civil penalties;

•

repair, replacement, recall or seizure of our products;

•

operating restrictions or partial suspension or total shutdown of production;

•

delaying or refusing our requests for approval of new products, new intended uses or modifications to our existing products and regulatory strategies;

•

exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid;

35

•

refusal to grant export or import approval for our products or refusal to allow us to enter into government contracts;

•

additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance;

•

withdrawing, suspension or variation in marketing approvals or CE Certificates of Conformity that have already been granted, resulting in prohibitions on sales of our products; and

•

criminal prosecution.

Any of these actions, in combination or alone, could prevent us from selling our products and harm our business. In addition, any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity.

Should we obtain approval or a CE Certificate of Conformity for our red blood cell system, we will likely be required by regulators or Notified Bodies to collect additional data in patients receiving INTERCEPT-treated red blood cells. In addition, assuming approval or certification, we will be required to develop a registry of patients receiving INTERCEPT-treated red blood cells for future data collection and evaluation. To commence, enroll and complete such a registry, we may incur significant costs. Further, introducing and implementing use of such a registry may face data collection challenges or resistance from transfusing physicians, hospitals or patients. We cannot ensure that the data collected in such a registry would support continued use of INTERCEPT-treated red blood cells.

In addition, the regulations to which we are subject are complex and have become more stringent over time. Regulatory changes could result in restrictions on our ability to carry on or expand our operations, increased operation costs or lower than anticipated sales. For example, complying with the new MDR will require considerable time, attention and effort by our manufacturers and us and may limit or delay any contemplated changes to our products or expansion of label claims. In addition, regulators have been impacted by the global staffing shortage, further constraining their ability to review submissions timely.

If we or our third-party suppliers fail to comply with the FDA’s or other regulatory authorities’ or foreign regulatory authorities' good manufacturing practice regulations, it could impair our ability to market our products in a cost-effective and timely manner.

In order to be used in clinical studies or sold in the U.S., our products are required to be manufactured in FDA-approved facilities. If any of our suppliers fail to comply with FDA’s cGMP regulations or otherwise fail to maintain FDA approval, we may be required to identify an alternate supplier for our products or components. Our products are complex and difficult to manufacture. Finding alternate facilities and obtaining FDA approval for the manufacture of the INTERCEPT Blood System at such facilities would be costly and time-consuming and would negatively impact our ability to generate product revenue from the sale of our platelet, plasma or cryoprecipitation system in the U.S. and achieve operating profitability. Our red blood cell system also needs to be manufactured in FDA-approved facilities, several of which are not currently FDA-approved. Failure of our suppliers to meet cGMP regulations and failure to obtain or maintain FDA approval will negatively impact our ability to achieve FDA approval for our products or may require that we identify, qualify and contract with alternative suppliers, if they are available, which would be time consuming, costly and result in further approval delays.

We, our third-party suppliers and third-party suppliers of products or components used by our customers in combination with our products are also required to comply with the cGMP and QSR requirements, which cover the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, control, quality assurance, labeling, packaging, sterilization, storage and shipping of products, all of which is costly and may require updating periodically. The FDA and other regulatory authorities, including international regulatory authorities and Notified Bodies, audit compliance with cGMP and QSR requirements through periodic announced and unannounced inspections of manufacturing and other facilities. These audits and inspections may be conducted at any time. The manufacturing facility which produces our platelet and plasma systems was recently audited by the FDA. While there were not objectionable conditions observed during the audit, the FDA or other regulatory authorities, including third country authorities and Notified Bodies, may inspect and audit facilities manufacturing our products or components or products and components of third-party suppliers used by our customers in combination with our products at any time. Complying with and resolving any audit findings may result in additional costs, changes to our manufacturers’ quality management systems or both. Failure to timely resolve and comply to audit findings, if any, may result in enforcement actions and may result in a disruption to the supply of our products or other products or components used by our customers in combination with our products. In any event, if we or our suppliers fail to adhere to cGMP and QSR requirements, have significant non-compliance issues or fail to timely and adequately respond to any adverse inspectional observations or product safety issues, or if any corrective action plan that we or our suppliers propose in response to observed deficiencies is not sufficient, the FDA or other regulatory agency could take enforcement action against us, which could delay production of our products and may include:

•

untitled letters, warning letters, fines, injunctions, consent decrees and civil penalties;

•

unanticipated expenditures to address or defend such actions;

•

customer notifications or repair, replacement, refunds, recall, detention or seizure of our products;

•

operating restrictions or partial suspension or total shutdown of production;

36

•

refusing or delaying our requests for premarket approval of new products or modified products;

•

withdrawing, suspension or variation of marketing approvals or CE Certificates of Conformity that have already been granted;

•

refusal to grant export or import approval for our products; or

•

criminal prosecution.

Any of the foregoing actions could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

If we modify our FDA-approved or CE Marked products, we may need to seek additional approvals, or certification, which, if not granted, would prevent us from selling our modified products.

Any modifications to the platelet, plasma or cryoprecipitation systems could be determined to significantly affect their safety or effectiveness, including significant design and manufacturing changes, or determined to constitute a major change in their intended use, manufacture, design, components, or technology which would require approval of a new premarket approval application, or PMA, or PMA supplement. Further, any modification to our plasma system may have an impact on the cryoprecipitation system, which may similarly require approval of a new PMA supplement. However, certain changes to a PMA-approved device do not require submission and approval of a new PMA or PMA supplement and may only require notice to FDA in a PMA Annual Report. The FDA requires every supplier to make this determination in the first instance, but the FDA may review any supplier’s decision. The FDA may not agree with our decisions regarding whether new submissions or approvals are necessary. Our products could be subject to recall if the FDA determines, for any reason, that our products are not safe or effective or that appropriate regulatory submissions were not made. If new regulatory approvals are required, this could delay or preclude our ability to market the modified system. For example, we are redesigning the illuminators used in the platelet and plasma systems and may need to further redesign the illuminator. We will need to obtain regulatory approval of any future redesign of the illuminator before it can be commercialized. Generating data from the new illuminator may be time consuming, expensive or unsuccessful. In addition, in order to address the entire market in the U.S., customers will need to change their operating practices to conform to our product specifications or we will need to obtain approval for additional configurations of the platelet system, as discussed in greater detail above under “Risks Related to Our Business and Industry—Our platelet and plasma products and product candidates are not compatible with some collection, production and storage methods or combinations thereof.” Should we decide not to pursue or otherwise fail to obtain FDA and foreign regulatory approvals of any new configurations, our ability to generate product revenue from sales of the platelet system may be impaired and our growth prospects may be materially and adversely affected.

In addition, if the FDA or other regulatory or accrediting body were to mandate safety interventions or modify existing requirements for safety interventions, including safety interventions involving the use of pathogen reduction technology, when we had not received approval for all operational configurations, the market to which we could sell our products may be limited until we obtain such approvals, if ever, or may be permanently impaired if competing options are more broadly available.

For those products sold in the EU, we must notify our Notified Body if significant changes are made to the products or if there are substantial changes to our quality assurance systems affecting those products. If a significant change is made to products for which CE Certificates of Conformities have been delivered on the basis of the MDD, we would no longer be able to rely on those CE Certificates of Conformities for purposes of placing the products on the EU market and would need to obtain CE Certificates of Conformity on the basis of the MDR. Obtaining certification can be a time-consuming process, and delays in obtaining required future clearances, certifications or approvals would adversely affect our ability to introduce new or enhanced products in a timely manner, which in turn would harm our future growth.

We are subject to federal, state and foreign laws governing our business practices which, if violated, could result in substantial penalties and harm our reputation and business.

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, processing) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, and sensitive third-party data.

Our data processing activities may subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations established in various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations relating to data privacy and security, that affect our sales, marketing and other promotional activities by, among other things, limiting the kinds of financial arrangements we may have with hospitals, healthcare providers or other potential purchasers of our products. These laws are often broadly written, and it is often difficult to determine precisely how these laws will be applied to specific circumstances. For example, within the EU, the control of unlawful marketing activities is a matter of national law and regulations in each of the EU Member States. There are a variety of organizations and entities within EU Member States which monitor perceived unlawful marketing activities. We could face civil, criminal and administrative sanctions if it is determined that we have breached our obligations in any EU Member State in respect of our marketing activities. Industry associations also closely monitor the activities of member companies. If

37

these organizations or authorities name us as having breached our obligations under their regulations, rules or standards, our reputation would suffer and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected.

In addition, there are numerous U.S. federal, state and local healthcare regulatory laws, and equivalent foreign laws, including but not limited to, anti-kickback laws, false claims laws, antitrust privacy laws, and transparency laws. Our relationships with healthcare providers and entities, including but not limited to, hospitals, blood centers, physicians, other healthcare providers, and our customers are subject to scrutiny under these laws. Violations of these laws can subject us to significant penalties, including, but not limited to, administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, including the Medicare and Medicaid programs, or equivalent foreign programs, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment of our operations. Healthcare fraud and abuse regulations are complex, and even minor irregularities can potentially give rise to claims that a statute or prohibition has been violated. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to:

•

the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, in exchange for or to induce, the referral of an individual for, the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of, any good, facility, item or service for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under federal healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid;

•

federal false claims laws, including the civil False Claims Act, which can be enforced by private citizens on behalf of the government, through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and the federal civil monetary penalties law, that prohibit, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment or approval from Medicare, Medicaid or other federal payors that are false or fraudulent, or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government, and which may apply to entities that provide coding and billing advice to customer;

•

the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended, or HIPAA, which created federal criminal laws that prohibit, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private payors, or making materially false statements in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters;

•

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, which impose requirements on covered entities, including certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their business associates and their subcontractors that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms as well as directly applicable privacy and security standards and requirements;

•

the Federal Trade Commission Act and similar laws regulating advertisement and consumer protections; and

•

foreign, or U.S. state or local law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers; U.S. state laws that require device companies to comply with the industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers; U.S. state and local laws that require device manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; and U.S. state laws governing the privacy and security of certain health information, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Moreover, our business practices are also subject to regulation by national, regional, state and local agencies, including but not limited to the Department of Justice, Federal Trade Commission, HHS Office of Inspector General and other regulatory bodies. For example, on November 29, 2022, we received a civil investigative demand, or the CID, from the U.S. Department of Justice Antitrust Division, or the Division, inquiring regarding contracting and information exchange practices related to our products and services. Although we do not believe that such practices violate antitrust regulations, we are unable to predict how long this investigation will continue or its outcome. At this time, the Division has not initiated any claim or proceeding against us relating to these matters. We are working cooperatively with the Division and are currently in the process of responding to the CID. If the outcome of the CID is unfavorable to us, it may result in changes to our business practices, fines, penalties or administrative sanctions against us, negative publicity and/or other negative actions that could materially harm our financial performance and results of operations, as well as our stock price. In addition, we have incurred and we expect to continue to incur significant costs in connection with this investigation, regardless of the outcome, which could harm our ability to achieve our financial performance objectives.

38

In addition, there has been a trend of increased U.S. federal, state and local regulation of payments and transfers of value provided to healthcare professionals or entities. The Physician Payments Sunshine Act, imposes annual reporting requirements on device manufacturers for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to track and annually report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, for payments and other transfers of value provided by them, directly or indirectly, to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their family members. Some states, such as California and Connecticut, also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs, and other states, such as Massachusetts and Vermont, impose restrictions on device manufacturer marketing practices and tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to healthcare professionals and entities. The shifting commercial compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with different compliance and reporting requirements in multiple jurisdictions increase the possibility that we may fail to comply fully with one or more of these requirements.

Outside the United States, interactions between medical devices companies and health care professionals are also governed by strict laws, such as national anti-bribery laws of European countries, national sunshine rules, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

We are also subject to domestic and foreign laws and regulations covering data privacy and the protection of health-related and other personal information. Domestic privacy and data security laws are complex and changing rapidly. Many states have enacted laws regulating the online collection, use and disclosure of personal information and requiring that companies implement reasonable data security measures. Laws in all states and U.S. territories also require businesses to notify affected individuals, governmental entities and/or credit reporting agencies of certain security breaches affecting personal information. These laws are not consistent, and compliance with them in the event of a widespread data breach is complex and costly.

In the U.S., the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA, gives California residents expanded rights related to their personal information, including the right to access and delete their personal information, and receive details about how their personal information is used and shared. These create an additional burden on us, as do the restrictions on “sales” of personal information that allow Californians to opt-out of certain sharing of their personal information. The CCPA prohibits discrimination against individuals who exercise their privacy rights, provides for civil penalties for violations and creates a private right of action for data breaches that is expected to increase data breach litigation. Similarly, the California Privacy Rights Act, or CPRA, when it becomes effective on January 1, 2023, will restrict use of certain categories of sensitive personal information; further restrict the use of cross-contextual advertising techniques; establish restrictions on the retention of personal information; expand the types of data breaches subject to the private right of action; and establish the California Privacy Protection Agency to implement and enforce the new law, as well as impose administrative fines. Other states have also enacted data privacy laws. For example, Virginia passed the Consumer Data Protection Act, and Colorado passed the Colorado Privacy Act, both of which differ from the CPRA and become effective in 2023. If we become subject to new data privacy laws, at the state level, the risk of enforcement action against us could increase because we may become subject to additional obligations, and the number of individuals or entities that can initiate actions against us may increase (including individuals, via a private right of action, and state actors).

In the EU, the General Data Protection Regulation, or EU GDPR, which is wide-ranging in scope, imposes detailed requirements, in particular, in relation to the control over personal data by individuals to whom the personal data relates, the information that we must provide to the individuals, the documentation we must maintain, the security and confidentiality of the personal data, data breach notification, the legal bases for processing personal data, the exceptions that allow us to process special categories of personal data and the use of third-party processors in connection with the processing of personal data. The EU GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data out of the EU and authorizes the imposition of large penalties for noncompliance, including the potential for fines of up to €20 million or 4% of the annual global revenues of the non-compliant company, whichever is greater. In addition, under the EU GDPR, companies may face private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests.

Further, the exit of the United Kingdom, or UK, from the EU on January 1, 2020, often referred to as Brexit, has created uncertainty with regard to data protection regulation in the UK. The UK has implemented legislation similar to the GDPR, the UK GDPR, including the UK Data Protection Act, which provides for fines of up to the greater of 17.5 million British Pounds or 4% of a company’s worldwide turnover, whichever is higher. Additionally, the relationship between the UK and the EU in relation to certain aspects of data protection law remains unclear following Brexit, including with respect to regulation of data transfers between EU Member States and the UK. On June 28, 2021, the European Commission announced a decision of “adequacy” concluding that the UK ensures an equivalent level of data protection to the GDPR, which provides some relief regarding the legality of continued personal data flows from the European Economic Area, or EEA, to the UK. Some uncertainty remains, however, as this adequacy determination must be renewed after four years and may be modified or revoked in the interim. We cannot fully predict how the Data Protection Act, the UK GDPR, and other UK data protection laws or regulations may develop in the medium to longer term nor the effects of divergent laws and guidance regarding how data transfers to and from the UK will be regulated.

39

Certain jurisdictions have enacted data localization laws and cross-border personal data transfer laws, which could make it more difficult to transfer information across jurisdictions (such as transferring or receiving personal data that originates in the EEA). Recent legal developments in Europe have created complexity and compliance uncertainty regarding certain transfers of personal data from the EEA. For example, on July 16, 2020, the Court of Justice of the European Union, or CJEU, invalidated the EU-U.S. Privacy Shield Framework, or the Privacy Shield, under which personal data could be transferred from the EEA to United States entities who had self-certified under the Privacy Shield scheme. While the CJEU upheld the adequacy of the standard contractual clauses, or SCCs, (a standard form of contract approved by the European Commission as an adequate personal data transfer mechanism, and potential alternative to the Privacy Shield), it made clear that reliance on them alone may not necessarily be sufficient in all circumstances. Use of SCCs must now be assessed on a case-by-case basis taking into account the legal regime applicable in the destination country, in particular applicable surveillance laws and rights of individuals. The new SCCs apply only to the transfer of personal data outside of the EEA and not the UK. The UK is not subject to the European Commission’s new SCCs but has published its own transfer mechanism, the International Data Transfer Agreement (“IDTA”), which enables transfers from the UK. In addition, additional measures may be required even when relying on SCCs or the IDTA, where the laws of the importer’s country do not offer an adequate level of protection, such as the United States.

The CCPA, CPRA and similar laws in other states, the EU GDPR, the UK GDPR and other international privacy laws have increased our responsibility and potential liability in relation to personal data that we process compared to prior law, including in clinical trials and employee data, and we may be required to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with these laws, which could divert management’s attention and increase our cost of doing business. However, despite our ongoing efforts to bring our practices into compliance with the EU GDPR and the UK GDPR, we may not be successful either due to various factors within our control or other factors outside our control. It is also possible that local courts and data protection authorities may have different interpretations of applicable law, leading to potential inconsistencies in application of these laws. If we are unable to implement sufficient safeguards to ensure that our transfers of personal information from the EEA or the UK are lawful, we will face increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines, and injunctions against processing personal information from the EEA or the UK.

Complying with our obligations under applicable privacy laws, regulations, amendments to or re-interpretations of existing laws and regulations, and contractual or other requirements relating to privacy, data protection, data transfers, data localization, or information security may require us to make changes to our services to enable us or our customers to meet new legal requirements, incur substantial operational costs, modify our data practices and policies, and restrict or otherwise impact our business operations. Any failure or alleged failure (including as a result of deficiencies in our policies, procedures or measures relating to privacy, data security, marketing or communications) by us or by the third parties on which we rely to comply with laws, regulations, policies, legal or contractual obligations, industry standards or regulatory guidance relating to privacy or data security, may result in governmental enforcement actions, including investigations litigation, fines, audits, inspections and other penalties or adverse publicity, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, bans on processing personal data and orders to destroy or not use personal data. Any of these events could have an adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations; inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. In addition, new regulations, legislative actions or changes in interpretation of existing laws or regulations regarding data privacy and security (together with applicable industry standards) may increase our costs of doing business.

We are also subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act and anti-corruption laws, and similar laws with a significant anti-corruption intent in foreign countries. In general, there is a worldwide trend to strengthen anticorruption laws and their enforcement. Any violation of these laws by us or our agents, distributors or joint venture partners could create a substantial liability for us, subject our officers and directors to personal liability and also cause a loss of reputation in the market. We currently operate in many countries where the public sector is perceived as being more or highly corrupt. Our strategic business plans include expanding our business in regions and countries that are rated as higher risk for corruption activity, such as China, India and Russia. Becoming familiar with and implementing the infrastructure necessary to comply with laws, rules and regulations applicable to new business activities and mitigate and protect against corruption risks could be quite costly. In addition, failure by us or our agents, distributors or joint venture partners to comply with these laws, rules and regulations could delay our expansion into high-growth markets, could damage market perception of our business and could adversely affect our existing business operations. Increased business in higher risk countries could also subject us and our officers and directors to increased scrutiny and increased liability.

To enforce compliance with the healthcare regulatory laws, federal and state enforcement bodies have increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which have led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Any such investigation or settlement could increase our costs or otherwise have an adverse effect on our business. In addition, most of these laws apply to not only the actions taken by us, but also actions taken by our distributors and other third-party agents, and healthcare providers with whom we interact. We have limited knowledge and control over the business practices of our distributors and agents, and we may face regulatory action against us as a result of their actions which could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, results of operations and financial condition.

40

Legislative, regulatory, or other healthcare reforms may make it more difficult and costly for us to obtain regulatory approval or CE Certificates of Conformity for our products and to produce, market and distribute our products after approval or certification is obtained.

Regulatory guidance and regulations are often revised or reinterpreted by the regulatory agencies in ways that may significantly affect our business and our products. Any new regulations or revisions or reinterpretations of existing regulations may impose additional costs or lengthen review times of our products. Delays in receipt of, or failure to receive, regulatory approvals or certification for our new products or product configurations would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Federal and state governments in the U.S. have enacted legislation to overhaul the nation’s healthcare system. While the goal of healthcare reform is to expand coverage to more individuals, it also involves increased government price controls, additional regulatory mandates and other measures designed to constrain medical costs. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, or ACA, continues to significantly impact the health care industry. Among other things, the ACA:

•

established a Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee and identify priorities in comparative clinical effectiveness research in an effort to coordinate and develop such research; and

•

implemented payment system reforms including a national pilot program on payment bundling to encourage hospitals, physicians and other providers to improve the coordination, quality and efficiency of certain healthcare services through bundled payment models.

There have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges to numerous provisions of the ACA. For example, legislation enacted in 2017, informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the Tax Act, included a provision repealing, effective January 1, 2019, the tax-based shared responsibility payment imposed by the ACA on certain individuals who fail to maintain qualifying health coverage for all or part of a year that is commonly referred to as the “individual mandate”. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Further, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in PPACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the "donut hole" under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any such challenges and the healthcare reform efforts of the Biden administration will impact ACA and our business. The implementation of new health care legislation could result in significant changes to the health care system, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and growth prospects.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. On August 2, 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals in spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for the years 2013 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will stay in effect until 2031, unless additional congressional action is taken. Under current legislation the actual reduction in Medicare payments will vary from 1% in 2022 to up to 4% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. On January 2, 2013, President Obama signed into law the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years.

More recently, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny in the U.S. to control the rising cost of healthcare. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent presidential executive orders, congressional inquiries and federal and state legislative activity designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to pricing and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for healthcare products. State legislatures are also increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control the cost of healthcare, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature, or extent of health reform initiatives that may arise from future legislation or administrative action. We expect that additional U.S. federal and state and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our products or additional pricing pressure.

The changes to the regulatory system implemented in the EU by the MDR include stricter requirements for clinical evidence and pre-market assessment of safety and performance, new classifications to indicate risk levels, requirements for third-party testing by Notified Bodies, additional requirements for the quality management system, traceability of products and transparency as well a refined responsibility of economic operators. We are also required to provide clinical data in the form of a clinical evaluation report. Fulfilment of the obligations imposed by the MDR may cause us to incur substantial costs. We may be unable to fulfil these obligations, or our

41

Notified Body, where applicable, may consider that we have not adequately demonstrated compliance with our related obligations to merit a CE Certificate of Conformity on the basis of the MDR.

Moreover, in the EU some countries may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of a particular medical device candidate to currently available therapies. This Health Technology Assessment, or 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 medical device in the national healthcare systems of the individual country is conducted. The outcome of HTA regarding specific medical device will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. On January 31, 2018, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a regulation on health technologies assessment. The proposed regulation is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medical devices, and providing the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. In December 2021 the HTA Regulation was adopted and entered into force on January 11, 2022. It will apply from 2025 onward.

Risks Related to Government Contracts

A significant portion of the funding for the development of the red blood cell system is expected to come from our BARDA agreement, and if BARDA were to eliminate, reduce, delay, or object to extensions for funding of our agreement, it would have a significant, negative impact on our government contract revenues and cash flows, and we may be forced to suspend or terminate our U.S. red blood cell development program or obtain alternative sources of funding.

We anticipate that a significant portion of the funding for the development of the red blood cell system in the United States will come from our agreement with BARDA. The agreement, including its subsequent modifications, provide for reimbursement of certain expenses incurred by us for up to approximately $245.9 million to support the development of the red blood cell system. However, our agreement with BARDA only reimburses certain specified development and clinical activities that have been authorized by BARDA pursuant to the base period and certain options of the agreement and the potential exercise of subsequent option periods. To date, BARDA has exercised approximately $148.9 million under the base period of the agreement and associated options. Accordingly, our ability to receive any of the unexercised $97.0 million in additional funding provided for under the BARDA agreement is dependent on BARDA exercising additional options under the agreement, which it may do or not do at its sole discretion. In addition, BARDA is entitled to terminate our BARDA agreement for convenience at any time, in whole or in part, and is not required to provide continued funding beyond reimbursement of amounts currently incurred and obligated by us as a result of contract performance. In addition, activities covered under the base period and exercised options may ultimately take longer than is allowed or cost more than is covered by the BARDA contract. Exercised and unexercised options under the BARDA contract will likely require a longer performance period to complete than is remaining on our agreement; if we are unable to secure additional funding or allow for additional time for completion, we would have to bear the cost to complete the activities or terminate the activities before completion. In addition, should there be a temporary funding shortfall with any of the activities contemplated, we may need to cease, delay or defer completion of the activities until the funding shortfall is resolved, if ever. For example, we know that certain options are expected to run out of approved amounts under the agreement in the near-term. Should BARDA be unable to secure additional funds to support those ongoing costs timely, or at all, we will have to cease, delay, defer or pay for ongoing activities. We are uncertain how the current U.S. debt ceiling will affect BARDA funding. We have hired and maintain staffing, as well as having entered into agreements with third parties to perform activities associated with the BARDA contract. Should we be unable to fully utilize the personnel or third parties as planned, either because of BARDA funding or time limitations, or other reasons, we may be forced to bear costs that we had anticipated would be covered under the contract. Moreover, the continuation of our BARDA agreement depends in large part on our ability to meet development milestones previously agreed to with BARDA and on our compliance with certain operating procedures and protocols. BARDA may suspend or terminate the agreement should we fail to achieve key milestones, or fail to comply with the operating procedures and processes approved by BARDA and its audit agency. There can be no assurance that we will be able to achieve these milestones or continue to comply with these procedures and protocols. The uncertainty regarding the after effects of the COVID-19 pandemic, and its impact on participating blood centers, hospitals and their patients, severe weather or other natural disaster impacts to sites enrolling our clinical trials may all negatively impact our ability to complete our clinical trials. Our ability to meet the expectations of BARDA under our contract is largely dependent on our ability to attract, hire and retain personnel with competencies that are in short supply. In addition, in many instances we must identify third-party suppliers, negotiate terms acceptable to us and BARDA and ensure ongoing compliance by these suppliers with the obligations covered by our BARDA agreement. If we are unable to provide adequate supplier oversight or if suppliers are unable to comply with the requirements of the agreement, our ability to meet the anticipated milestones may be impaired.

There can also be no assurance that our BARDA agreement will not be terminated, that our BARDA agreement will be extended for existing exercised options or through the exercise of subsequent option periods, that any such extensions would be on terms favorable to us, or that we will otherwise obtain the funding that we anticipate to obtain under our agreement with BARDA. In addition, access to federal contracts is subject to the authorization of funds and approval of our research plans by various organizations within the federal government, including the U.S. Congress. The general economic environment and uncertainty, coupled with tight federal budgets, and the lack of congressional unanimity on the national debt ceiling and budget, has led to a general decline in the amount available for government funding. Moreover, changes in government budgets and agendas may result in a decreased and deprioritized emphasis on

42

supporting the development of pathogen reduction technology. While BARDA has provided funding for and has indicated a potential for future funding for many activities associated with combating COVID-19, the availability and focus for any BARDA funding will likely be finite and may require us to compete with other technologies, both similar and disparate. Furthermore, funding limitations may require certain activities to slow or be deferred which may be impractical to do. In addition, if we are unable to generate sufficient prerequisite Phase 3 clinical data, our agreement with BARDA will be severely limited in scope or could be terminated altogether, and our ability to complete the development activities required for licensure in the U.S. may require additional capital beyond which we currently have. If our BARDA agreement is terminated or suspended, if there is any reduction or delay in funding under our BARDA agreement, or if BARDA determines not to exercise some or all of the options provided for under the agreement, our revenues and cash flows would be significantly and negatively impacted and we may be forced to seek alternative sources of funding, which may not be available on non-dilutive terms, terms favorable to us or at all. If alternative sources of funding are not available, or if we determine that the cost of alternative available capital is too high, we may be forced to suspend or terminate development activities related to the red blood cell system in the U.S. Furthermore, should we be unable to deploy personnel or derive a benefit from fixed study costs or generate data from clinical sites and studies reimbursed by BARDA, our cash flows would be negatively impacted, or we may have to initiate furloughs and layoffs which would likely prove disruptive to our management and operations. This in turn would impair our ability to complete ongoing studies or commence new studies.

In addition, under the BARDA agreement, BARDA will regularly review our development efforts and clinical activities. Under certain circumstances, BARDA may advise us to delay certain activities and invest additional time and resources before proceeding. If we follow such BARDA advice, overall red blood cell program delays and costs associated with additional resources for which we had not planned may result. Also, the costs associated with following such advice may or may not be reimbursed by BARDA under our agreement. Finally, we may decide not to follow the advice provided by BARDA and instead pursue activities that we believe are in the best interests of our red blood cell program and our business, even if BARDA would not reimburse us under our agreement.

Unfavorable provisions in government contracts, including in our contracts with BARDA, FDA and DoD, may harm our business, financial condition and operating results.

U.S. government contracts typically contain unfavorable provisions and are subject to audit and modification by the government at its sole discretion, which will subject us to additional risks. For example, under our agreement with BARDA, the U.S. government has the power to unilaterally:

•

audit and object to any BARDA agreement-related costs and fees on grounds that they are not allowable under the Federal Acquisition Regulation, or FAR, and require us to reimburse all such costs and fees;

•

suspend or prevent us for a set period of time from receiving new contracts or grants or extending our existing agreement based on violations or suspected violations of laws or regulations;

•

claim nonexclusive, nontransferable rights to product manufactured and intellectual property developed under the BARDA agreement and may, under certain circumstances involving public health and safety, license such inventions to third parties without our consent;

•

cancel, terminate or suspend our BARDA agreement based on violations or suspected violations of laws or regulations;

•

terminate our BARDA agreement in whole or in part for the convenience of the government for any reason or no reason, including if funds become unavailable to the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response;

•

reduce the scope and value of our BARDA agreement;

•

decline to exercise an option to continue the BARDA agreement;

•

direct the course of the development of the red blood cell system in a manner not chosen by us;

•

require us to perform the option periods provided for under the BARDA agreement even if doing so may cause us to forego or delay the pursuit of other red blood cell program opportunities with greater commercial potential;

•

take actions that result in a longer development timeline than expected;

•

limit the government’s financial liability to amounts appropriated by the U.S. Congress on a fiscal-year basis, thereby leaving some uncertainty about the future availability of funding for the red blood cell program even after it has been funded for an initial period; and

•

change certain terms and conditions in our BARDA agreement.

Generally, government contracts, including our agreement with BARDA, FDA and DoD, contain provisions permitting unilateral termination or modification, in whole or in part, at the U.S. government’s convenience. Termination-for-convenience provisions generally enable us to recover only our costs incurred or committed (plus a portion of the agreed fee) and settlement expenses on the

43

work completed prior to termination. Except for the amount of services received by the government, termination-for-default provisions do not permit recovery of fees. In addition, in the event of termination or upon expiration of our BARDA agreement, the U.S. government may dispute wind-down and termination costs and may question prior expenses under the contract and deny payment of those expenses. Should we choose to challenge the U.S. government for denying certain payments under our BARDA agreement, such a challenge could subject us to substantial additional expenses that we may or may not recover. Further, if any of our government contracts are terminated for convenience, or if we default by failing to perform in accordance with the contract schedule and terms, a significant negative impact on our cash flows and operations could result. Our ability to receive funding under our contract with DoD for the development of pathogen reduced, lyophilized cryoprecipitate is based on achievement of milestones which cannot be guaranteed. If we are unable to achieve any of those milestones, funding may be limited, less than expected, or non-existent for that particular milestone, which in all cases would negatively impact our cash flows and financial results.

In addition, government contracts normally contain additional requirements that may increase our costs of doing business and expose us to liability for failure to comply with these terms and conditions. These requirements include, for example:

•

specialized accounting systems unique to government contracts;

•

mandatory financial audits and potential liability for price adjustments or recoupment of government funds after such funds have been spent;

•

public disclosures of certain contract information, which may enable competitors to gain insights into our research program;

•

mandatory internal control systems and policies; and

•

mandatory socioeconomic compliance requirements, including labor standards, non-discrimination and affirmative action programs and environmental compliance requirements.

If we fail to maintain compliance with these requirements, we may be subject to potential liability and to the termination of our government contracts.

Furthermore, we have entered into and will continue to enter into agreements and subcontracts with third parties, including suppliers, consultants and other third-party contractors, in order to satisfy our contractual obligations under our government contracts. Negotiating and entering into such arrangements can be time-consuming and we may not be able to reach agreement with such third parties. Any such agreement must also be compliant with the terms of our government contracts. Any delay or inability to enter into such arrangements or entering into such arrangements in a manner that is non-compliant with the terms of our contract, may result in violations of our government contracts.

To ensure proper administration of our government contracts, including management of third-party suppliers, consultants or contractors, we must invest and commit resources to undertake significant compliance activities. The diversion of resources from our development and commercial programs to these compliance activities, as well as the exercise by the U.S. government of any rights under these provisions, could materially harm our business.

Laws and regulations affecting government contracts, including our agreements with BARDA, FDA and DoD, make it more costly and difficult for us to successfully conduct our business. Failure to comply with laws and regulations could result in significant civil and criminal penalties and adversely affect our business.

We must comply with numerous laws and regulations relating to the administration and performance of our agreements. Among the most significant government contracting regulations are:

•

the FAR and agency-specific regulations supplemental to the FAR, which comprehensively regulate the procurement, formation, administration and performance of government contracts;

•

the business ethics and public integrity obligations, which govern conflicts of interest and the hiring of former government employees, restrict the granting of gratuities and funding of lobbying activities and incorporate other requirements such as the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Procurement Integrity Act, the False Claims Act and the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act;

•

export and import control laws and regulations; and

•

laws, regulations and executive orders restricting the exportation of certain products and technical data.