Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

☒ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

For the Fiscal Year Ended December 31, 2022

☐TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934

Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

863 Mitten Road, Suite 102, Burlingame, CA94010

(Address of principal executive offices, including Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (650) 900-4520

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act:

Title of each class Trading symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered

Common Stock, Par Value $0.0001 per share CRVS Nasdaq Global Market

Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ◻No⌧

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or Section 15(d) of the Act. Yes ◻No⌧

Indicate by check mark whether the issuer (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes⌧ No ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit and post such files). Yes⌧ No ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer ◻ Accelerated filer ◻

Non-accelerated filer ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒

Emerging growth company ◻

If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ◻

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b) . ☐

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

As of June 30, 2022, the aggregate market value of Common Stock held by non-affiliates of the registrant was approximately $34.2 million, computed by reference to the closing price as reported on The Nasdaq Stock Market. As of March 28, 2023, 46,568,511 shares of the registrant’s common stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be filed for its 2023 Annual Meeting of Stockholders are incorporated by reference into Part III hereof. Such proxy statement will be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

CORVUS PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

ANNUAL REPORT ON FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PART I

ITEM 1. Business 1

ITEM 1A. Risk Factors 30

ITEM 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 76

ITEM 2. Properties 76

ITEM 3. Legal Proceedings 76

ITEM 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 76

PART II

ITEM 6. [Reserved] 78

ITEM 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 89

ITEM 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 90

ITEM 9A. Controls and Procedures 115

ITEM 9B. Other Information 116

ITEM 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections 116

PART III

ITEM 11. Executive Compensation 117

ITEM 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 117

PART IV

ITEM 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 118

Signatures 122

Table of Contents

Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. All statements other than statements of historical facts contained in this report are forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terminology such as “may,” “could,” “will,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “intend,” “predict,” “seek,” “contemplate,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other comparable terminology. These forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

● our commercialization, marketing and manufacturing capabilities and strategy;

● the pricing and reimbursement of our product candidates, if approved;

Table of Contents

● our financial performance.

Any forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K reflect our current views with respect to future events or to our future financial performance and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from any future results, performance or achievements expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from current expectations include, among other things, those listed under Part I, Item 1A. Risk Factors and discussed elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Given these uncertainties, you should not place undue reliance on these forward-looking statements. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update or revise these forward-looking statements for any reason, even if new information becomes available in the future.

This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains estimates, projections and other information concerning our industry, our business and the markets for certain drugs, including data regarding the estimated size of those markets, their projected growth rates and the incidence of certain medical conditions. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties, and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances reflected in this information. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we obtained this industry, business, market and other data from reports, research surveys, studies and similar data prepared by third parties, industry, medical and general publications, government data and similar sources. In some cases, we do not expressly refer to the sources from which this data is derived. In that regard, when we refer to one or more sources of this type of data in any paragraph, you should assume that other data of this type appearing in the same paragraph is derived from the same sources, unless otherwise expressly stated or the context otherwise requires.

Except where the context otherwise requires, in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, “we,” “us,” “our” and the “Company” refer to Corvus Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

Trademarks

This Annual Report on Form 10-K includes trademarks, service marks and trade names owned by us or other companies. All trademarks, service marks and trade names included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K are the property of their respective owners.

iii

Table of Contents

Risk Factor Summary

Below is a summary of the principal factors that make an investment in our common stock speculative or risky. This summary does not address all of the risks that we face. Additional discussion of the risks summarized in this risk factor summary, and other risks that we face, can be found below under the heading “Risk Factors” and should be carefully considered, together with other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our other filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) before making investment decisions regarding our common stock.

Table of Contents

Part I

Item 1. Business

Overview

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company. Our strategy is to focus our efforts on the development of immune modulator product candidates with the potential to treat solid cancers, T cell lymphomas, autoimmune, allergic and infectious diseases. We have built a pipeline of five programs, three of which are in clinical development.

Our lead product candidate is CPI-818, a selective, covalent inhibitor of ITK and is in a multi-center Phase 1/1b clinical trial in patients with various malignant T cell lymphomas. CPI-818 is designed to inhibit the proliferation of certain malignant T cells and also to affect the differentiation of normal T cells, which could enhance immunity to tumor cells. We believe these properties have the potential to regulate the growth and activity of abnormal T cells involved in autoimmunity and allergy.

Our second product candidate, ciforadenant, is an oral, small molecule antagonist of the A2A receptor for adenosine designed to disable a tumor’s ability to subvert attack by the immune system by blocking the binding of immunosuppressive adenosine in the tumor microenvironment to the A2A receptor. We are collaborating with the Kidney Cancer Research Consortium to evaluate ciforadenant in an open label Phase 1b/2 clinical trial as a first line therapy for metastatic RCC in combination with ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) and nivolumab (anti-PD-1)

Our third product candidate is mupadolimab, a humanized monoclonal antibody that is designed to react with a specific site on CD73. In both preclinical and in vivo studies, mupadolimab has demonstrated binding to various immune cells and the enhancement of immune responses by activating B cells. While we believe mupadolimab has the potential to be an important new therapeutic agent with a novel mechanism of action for the treatment of a broad range of cancers and infectious diseases, we are waiting to initiate a potential Phase 2 randomized clinical trial in order to prioritize the development of our other two lead product candidates. Angel Pharmaceuticals is continuing the development of mupadolimab in China and is enrolling patients in a Phase 1 trial with mupadolimab alone and together with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced NSCLC and head and neck cancer.

Our molecularly targeted product candidates are designed to exhibit a high degree of specificity, which we believe have the potential to provide greater safety compared to other cancer therapies and may facilitate their development either as monotherapies or in combination with other cancer therapies such as immune checkpoint inhibitors or chemotherapy.

We believe the breadth and status of our pipeline demonstrates our management team’s expertise in understanding and developing immunology focused assets as well as in identifying product candidates that can be in-licensed and further developed internally to treat many types of cancer. We hold worldwide rights to all of our product candidates (other than in greater China).

Our diverse and versatile product candidates have also enabled us to address markets in foreign markets. In October 2020, we announced the formation and launch of Angel Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd. (“Angel Pharmaceuticals”), a China based biopharmaceutical company with a mission to bring innovative quality medicines to Chinese patients for treatment of serious diseases including cancer, autoimmune diseases and infectious diseases. We formed Angel Pharmaceuticals as a wholly owned subsidiary and it launched with a post-money valuation of approximately $106.0 million, based on an approximate $41.0 million cash investment from a Chinese investor group that includes funds associated with Tigermed and Betta Pharmaceuticals, Hisun Pharmaceuticals and Zhejiang Puissance Capital. Such cash is not available for our use. Contemporaneously with the financing, Angel Pharmaceuticals licensed the rights to develop and commercialize our three clinical-stage candidates – CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab – in greater China and obtained global rights to our BTK inhibitor preclinical programs. Under the collaboration, we currently have a 49.7% equity interest in Angel Pharmaceuticals, excluding 7% of Angel’s equity reserved for issuance under the Employee Stock Ownership Plan (“ESOP”), and are entitled to designate three individuals on Angel’s five-person board of directors.

Table of Contents

Product Pipeline

Our product candidate pipeline includes the following:

CPI-818, ITK Inhibitor. CPI-818 is an investigational selective, orally bioavailable, covalent inhibitor of ITK. ITK, an enzyme that functions in T cell signaling and differentiation, is expressed predominantly in T cells, which are lymphocytes that play a vital role in immune responses. T cell lymphomas are malignancies of T cells that proliferate and spread throughout the body. These lymphomas often have tonic signaling through the T cell receptor pathway, which involves ITK. Inhibition of ITK could result in blockade of this signaling pathway and control the growth of the malignancy. In addition, one of the key survival mechanisms of both lymphomas and solid tumors is believed to be the reprogramming of normal T cells to create an inflammatory environment that inhibits anti-tumor immune response and favors tumor growth. We believe highly selective inhibitors of this enzyme will facilitate induction of normal T cell anti-tumor immunity and may be useful in the treatment of solid tumors as well as lymphomas.

T cell signaling involving ITK is required in the development of T cells within the thymus, where ITK regulates the production of various T cell subsets and functions. The ITK cell signaling pathway is similar to the signaling that occurs in B cells, which is mediated by a homologous enzyme known as BTK, the target of ibrutinib, an approved treatment for patients with B cell lymphomas and leukemias. We believe that inhibiting ITK in malignant T cells may be of therapeutic benefit in patients with T cell leukemias and lymphomas, analogous to the effects of ibrutinib on B cell lymphomas and leukemias. ITK is expressed in many T cell lymphomas, including peripheral T cell lymphoma (“PTCL”), angioimmunoblastic T cell lymphoma (“AITL”), cutaneous T cell lymphomas (“CTCL”), anaplastic large cell lymphomas (“ALCL”), natural killer T cell lymphomas (“NKTCL”) and other T cell malignancies.

In ITK genetic knockout mice, which completely lack expression of ITK, T cells exhibit defects in T helper cell differentiation and cytokine secretion but retain the ability to differentiate into cytotoxic T cells that secrete IL 2 and interferon gamma (“IFNg”), which are the cells responsible for tumor rejection. We believe that skewing T helper cell differentiation to favor cytotoxic T cells, known as Th1 skewing, may be beneficial in treating T cell lymphomas and many other types of cancer. ITK deficient mice also demonstrate a reduction in Th2 cells, which are the cells often responsible for autoimmunity and allergy.

We have developed CPI-818 by targeting the cysteine amino acid residue at position 442 in the ITK protein. We believe covalent targeting of ITK has the potential to provide a selective and prolonged duration of activity without the need for high systemic exposures and thereby improve the therapeutic window. This approach was previously used by our cofounders to generate ibrutinib. We believe that the potential selectivity of CPI-818 could mimic the immune effects seen in ITK knockout mice and skew the immune response toward a more favorable anti-tumor immune response

Table of Contents

as well as reducing the activity of Th2 cells. The blockade of Th2 differentiation has the potential to suppress inflammatory reactions involved in various autoimmune and allergic diseases. CPI-818 was designed to have the necessary selectivity to specifically block ITK function without altering other closely related enzymes involved in T cell differentiation. We believe such selectivity is required for achieving Th1 skewing and Th2 blockade, as demonstrated by ITK genetic knockout studies in mice. ITK also plays a role in the proliferation of some T cell lymphomas and we believe its inhibition could lead to growth arrest and/or tumor cell cytotoxicity. In our preclinical studies of CPI-818, objective tumor responses were observed in dogs with spontaneous T cell lymphomas. Other in vitro studies with normal human peripheral blood T cells showed that the observed effects of CPI-818 on T cell function were concentration dependent. At high concentrations (10 micromolar) T cell proliferation was inhibited. At lower concentrations between 0.01 and 10 micromolar, Th1 skewing was observed. These data suggest that the dose of CPI-818 may be important in achieving the desired effects on T cell function.

CPI-818 is orally bioavailable and has achieved cellular occupancy of the target in vivo in various animal models. Pre-clinical studies have demonstrated that CPI-818 was well-tolerated in vivo and resulted in inhibition of T cell activation. In March of 2019, we initiated a Phase 1/1b study of single agent CPI-818 in patients with advanced refractory T cell lymphomas.

CPI-818 is currently being studied in a Phase 1/1b clinical trial that was designed to select the recommended Phase 2 dose of CPI-818 and evaluate its safety, pharmacokinetics (“PK”), target occupancy, immunologic effects, biomarkers and efficacy. The study employs an adaptive, expansion cohort design, with an initial phase that evaluated escalating doses (100, 200, 400, 600 mg taken twice a day) in successive cohorts of patients, followed by a second phase that is designed to evaluate safety and tumor response to the recommended dose of CPI-818 in disease-specific patient cohorts. By protocol design, treatment is discontinued after one year or upon disease progression. The study has enrolled patients from the United States, Australia and South Korea with several types of advanced, refractory T cell lymphomas. During the dose escalation phase of the study, and with longer follow up, it became clear that the patients receiving the 200mg twice per day dose were demonstrating higher response rates as well as longer disease control. This dose was determined to be the optimal dose and was consistent with dose-response effects seen in vitro experiments described above.

In December 2022 at the American Society of Hematology Annual Meeting (“ASH”), we presented preliminary Phase 1/1b clinical data with CPI-818 in refractory T cell lymphomas. The data presented were as of a September 2, 2022 data cut-off:

T Cell Lymphoma Interim Data Highlights

Immunologic Interim Data Highlights

Table of Contents

As of February 23, 2023, we have enrolled a total of 53 patients with several types of advanced, refractory T cell lymphomas in our Phase 1/1b clinical trial. Enrollment in the 200 mg cohort has continued with 20 patients enrolled, including 13 evaluable for tumor response. There have been 1 complete response (CR) of 24 months duration, 1 equivocal CR awaiting confirmatory PET scan of 13+ months duration (a previous PR), 1 nodal CR of 21 months duration and 1 PR of 7 months duration. Ten patients continue on therapy, including seven that have not yet been evaluated for tumor response. The swimmer and waterfall plots for these patients are in the following figures 1 and 2, respectively.

Table of Contents

Figure 1: Swimmer Plot for Patients in the 200 mg Dose Cohort of the CPI-818 Phase 1/1b Clinical Trial for T Cell Lymphoma. The plot shows the tumor response and duration for patients with various tumor histologies, which are shown on the chart and defined as follows: PTCL-NOS, peripheral T cell lymphoma not otherwise specified; CTCL-SS, cutaneous T cell lymphoma Sezary; CTCL-MF, cutaneous T cell lymphoma mycosis fungoides; AITL, angioimmunoblastic T cell lymphoma; ALCL, anaplastic T cell lymphoma and NKTCL, natural killer T cell lymphoma. The tumor response evaluation are labeled on the chart and are defined as follows: CR, complete response; equivocal CR; PR, partial response; SD, stable disease; PD, progressive disease. Arrows indicate that treatment with CPI-818 is continuing as of the February 23, 2023 data cut-off.

Table of Contents

Figure 2: Waterfall Plot for Patients in the 200 mg Dose Cohort of the CPI-818 Phase 1/1b Clinical Trial for T Cell Lymphoma. The plot shows the best percent change in tumor volume in the evaluable patients from the same group shown in Figure 1.

Treating patients in the 200 mg cohort has identified a biomarker associated with response to CPI-818. CPI-818 induces a host anti-tumor cell mediated immune response that requires normal functioning T cells. Data from the 200 mg cohort in the Phase 1/1b clinical trial indicates that a minimum absolute lymphocyte count (ALC) above 900 cells per cubic milliliter of blood is required for tumor response and disease control. Four of eight patients with ALC above 900 have objective responses (those four patients are described above), all eight have disease control (stable disease, PR, CR) and the median progression free survival (PFS) is 28.1 months. No objective responses were seen in five patients (0 of 5) with ALC below 900 and the PFS is 2.1 months. The ALC biomarker is routinely measured, is consistent with CPI-818’s presumed mechanism of action and is present in about 70% of patients based on the Company’s experience to-date. This biomarker has been incorporated as an eligibility criterion in the ongoing Phase 1/1b clinical trial.

Based on the current enrollment rate of our Phase 1/1b clinical trial, we believe that the number of patients treated in the clinical trial would provide adequate safety and preliminary efficacy data to inform the design of a registration clinical trial. We expect such a trial to enroll patients with relapsed T cell lymphomas whose prognosis is poor with currently available therapies. Although there are single agents approved for this disease, the current National Cooperative Cancer Network guidelines recommend that patients be enrolled in experimental therapies indicating a serious unmet need for improved therapies to treat T cell lymphomas. We recently received a communication from the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) regarding our clinical development plans for CPI-818. As recommended by the FDA, we plan to request a meeting with the FDA to discuss the design of a registration Phase 3 clinical trial. We anticipate that this meeting will take place later this year.

Separate from the ASH presentation, we recently initiated a study of CPI-818 in companion dogs with naturally occurring, refractory atopic dermatitis. Atopic dermatitis is an inflammatory disease of the skin that is mediated by Th2 cells and their secreted cytokines. Early results from this study demonstrated CPI-818’s potential activity in this disease

Table of Contents

with five out of five treated dogs responding to therapy within 14 days. Based on recent progress and data supporting the ongoing development of CPI-818 for T cell lymphoma and other cancers, we have decided to delay our plans to initiate a Phase 1 clinical trial in atopic dermatitis. This decision allows us to conserve cash and intensify our focus on T cell lymphoma, which could include conducting a potentially registrational, randomized Phase 3 trial. While we are pausing development of CPI-818 for the treatment of atopic dermatitis, we will continue to investigate the potential role of CPI-818 in immune diseases through our ongoing and planned preclinical research and external collaborations.

In February 2023 at the 30th Annual Conference on Retroviruses and Opportunistic Infections (“CROI”), data were presented demonstrating CPI-818’s potential to block chronic human immunodeficiency virus (“HIV”) latency reversal. For people living with HIV (“PLWH”) on antiretroviral therapy, HIV can be reduced to levels below detection limits, which enables the restoration and preservation of immune system function, reduces HIV-associated morbidity and prevents HIV transmission. However, in these individuals the virus persists in a latent form in CD4 cells, which are white blood cells that are a key component of the immune system that are destroyed by HIV. Viral latency is reversed if therapy is discontinued, leading to a re-emergence of replicating HIV and the destruction of CD4 cells, necessitating PLWH to be on life-long therapy.

Previous studies have shown that ITK is involved in several steps in the HIV life cycle and in this study, researchers explored the potential of ITK inhibition with CPI-818 to inhibit the latency reversal of HIV. The study was conducted in two models: (1) a T cell lymphoma cell line latently infected with fluorescence-tagged HIV (in vitro) and (2) CD4+ T cells from the blood of four PLWH (ex-vivo). In both models, the cells were stimulated to reverse viral latency and promote viral replication. The cells were simultaneously treated with various concentrations of CPI-818, and in each of the two models, there was a statistically significant and dose-dependent reduction in the reversal of viral latency (P<0.0001) including four of the four PLWH. In CD4 T cells, CPI-818 inhibited the proliferation of HIV-infected cells more than uninfected cells.

We have filed patent applications covering composition of matter and uses of our ITK inhibitors and hold exclusive worldwide rights (except for greater China) for all indications.

Ciforadenant Adenosine A2A Receptor Antagonist. Ciforadenant is an oral, small molecule antagonist of the A2A receptor for adenosine that we in-licensed from Vernalis (R&D) Limited (“Vernalis”) in February 2015. Since licensing ciforadenant, we have conducted extensive laboratory studies in vitro and in vivo in animal models to evaluate ciforadenant’s immune enhancing and anti-tumor properties. In these studies, orally administered ciforadenant inhibited tumor growth in multiple mouse models of cancer as a single agent, in combination with anti-PD-1, in combination with anti-PD-L1, in combination with other immuno oncology agents and in combination with certain chemotherapy drugs. We also have shown in vitro that ciforadenant blocked adenosine mediated immunosuppression by restoring T cell function. In addition, we have shown anti-tumor activity in mice for a significant time following oral administration, which appeared to be mediated through a long-lasting memory immune response.

Adenosine activates an immune checkpoint, the adenosine A2A receptor, that is used by the body to limit inflammation and immune responses. It is produced during acute, inflammatory processes in two steps. Increased levels of adenosine seen in tumors interact with the A2A and A2B receptors expressed on several cells of the immune system, including T cells, NK cells, macrophages, dendritic cells and myeloid derived suppressor cells, as well as other cells, which has the effect of dampening the immune response to the tumor.

We also discovered the Adenosine Gene Signature, which we believe has demonstrated the potential to serve as a biomarker to identify patients most likely to respond to treatment with ciforadenant. The results of our Phase 1/1b clinical trial involving 68 patients with RCC were published in the journal Cancer Discovery in January 2020. This study reported that in 30 patients evaluated for the Adenosine Gene Signature, no patients showing a low Adenosine Gene Signature exhibited signs of tumor regression while 17% (3 of 18) of patients with a high Adenosine Gene Signature had an overall response rate by RECIST criteria. Based on these results, we are collaborating with the Kidney Cancer Research Consortium to evaluate ciforadenant in an open label Phase 1b/2 clinical trial as a first line therapy for metastatic RCC in combination with ipilimumab (anti-CTLA-4) and nivolumab (anti-PD-1). The clinical trial is expected to enroll approximately 60 patients. In the Phase 1b portion of the clinical trial (N=8), the primary endpoints are safety, tolerability and anti-tumor activity. In the Phase 2 portion of the clinical trial, the primary endpoint is the percent of patients that achieve a deep response, defined as complete response or depth of partial response of greater than 50% tumor reduction. Historical data has shown that deep responses correlate with prolonged progression free

Table of Contents

survival and is seen in approximately 32% of patients with RCC receiving ipilimumab and nivolumab. The Adenosine Gene Signature biomarker also will be evaluated in tumor biopsy specimens. The trial design is based on our preclinical research published in 2018 in Cancer Immunology Research that demonstrated impressive antitumor control and cures in several animal models using ciforadenant in combination with anti-CTLA4 and anti-PD1. Preclinical studies and data from earlier clinical trials with ciforadenant, suggest adenosine may be a cause of resistance to current therapies with anti PD(L)-1. The Kidney Cancer Research Consortium is comprised of a group of leading cancer centers in the United States led by investigators at MD Anderson.

The issued U.S. patents that we in licensed from Vernalis for ciforadenant are directed to the composition of matter of ciforadenant and its method-of-use for treating disorders treatable by purine receptor blocking and are expected to expire between September 2028 and July 2029, excluding any patent term extension that may be available. We hold an exclusive, worldwide license (except for greater China) under these patent rights and related know how, including a limited right to grant sublicenses, for all fields of use, to develop, manufacture and commercialize products containing certain adenosine receptor antagonists, including ciforadenant. We have also filed patent applications covering the use of ciforadenant in combination with other checkpoint inhibitors, and the use of various biomarkers to select and monitor patients receiving therapy.

Mupadolimab, B Cell Activating anti-CD73 antibody. Mupadolimab is a unique anti-CD73 antibody that is designed to bind to a critical epitope involved in B cell signaling. Our work in both cancer and viral diseases, such as COVID-19, have provided important insights and data into how we may best evaluate the biologic properties of our antibody candidate in the clinic. Our studies have uncovered a novel potential mechanism of action: mupadolimab has the ability to activate B cells which may then be driven into antibody producing plasma cells by the presence of tumor associated antigens within the tumor. Recent work by several scientific groups have highlighted the importance of B cells in anti-tumor immunity. As published in Nature in 2020, investigators have shown that B cell infiltration in some tumors are strong predictors of response to immunotherapies and predictors of favorable outcomes. CD73 is also involved in the generation of adenosine in the tumor microenvironment, which is immunosuppressive. Mupadolimab has found to block production of adenosine in addition to its B cell stimulating properties.

In February 2018, we initiated a Phase 1/1b clinical trial with mupadolimab administered alone and in combination with ciforadenant or pembrolizumab, and in combination with ciforadenant and pembrolizumab. We completed this trial in 2022 enrolling over 115 patients at doses of up to 24 mg/kg every three weeks. Key findings from this trial include the observation that mupadolimab was well-tolerated and evidence of B cell activation and lymphocyte trafficking was observed in patients that received single doses as low as 1 mg/kg. Treatment with mupadolimab was also associated with increases in memory B cells in the blood, the emergence of new B cell clones and, in some patients, the production of novel anti-tumor antibodies.

At the 2021 Annual Meeting of the Society for Immunotherapy of Cancer (“SITC”) in November 2021, we presented interim data demonstrating anti-tumor activity in NSCLC and head and neck cancer (“HNSCC”) patients treated with 12 mg/kg or greater of mupadolimab as a single agent, in combination with ciforadenant, in combination with pembrolizumab or in combination with pembrolizumab and ciforadenant. These patients had advanced refractory disease and failed a median of three prior therapies. Further, all but one had failed therapy with prior anti PD(L)-1 antibodies. There were 16 evaluable NSCLC and HNSCC patients. Seven patients achieved tumor regression, which did not meet the criteria for partial response by RECIST. However, of the patients that showed tumor regression, six patients had progressive disease as their best response to their last treatment prior to entering the Phase 1/1b clinical trial, which indicates that the tumors in these patients were not responsive to their last therapy. The seven patients who showed tumor regression on the trial were treated for a period of 4.5 to 12.5 months. We published the results of these studies and the characterization of mupadolimab in December 2022 in the Journal of Immunotherapy of Cancer.

Based on the results from this trial, we believe this program is ready to advance into a randomized Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating mupadolimab in combination with pembrolizumab and chemotherapy as a front-line therapy for the treatment of patients with NSCLC. However, we are delaying the initiation of this clinical trial in order to prioritize the development of CPI-818, ciforadenant, as well as and to conserve capital. Angel Pharmaceuticals is continuing the development of mupadolimab in China and is enrolling patients in a Phase 1 trial with mupadolimab alone and together with pembrolizumab in patients with advanced NSCLC and head and neck cancer.

Table of Contents

CPI-182, Anti-CXCR2 Antibody designed to block inflammation and Myeloid Suppression. In 2017, we in-licensed this monoclonal antibody designed to block CXCR2, a novel target expressed on neutrophils and various inflammatory cells including myeloid derived suppressor cells (“MDSC”). Preclinical studies have demonstrated that this antibody blocked neutrophil function and migration, and MDSCs. MDSCs are involved in tumor immunosuppression and blockade of these cells may improve anti-tumor immunity. A publication describing this antibody was published in the journal MABS in January 2021. Preclinical data in vivo in mice demonstrated that CPI-182 was active in models of rheumatoid arthritis and in models of atopic dermatitis. We believe these data support the role of CXCR in inflammatory diseases and demonstrate that CPI-182 may have the potential to treat these conditions. This product candidate is now in Investigational New Drug application (“IND”)-enabling studies.

CPI-935, Adenosine A2B Receptor Antagonist. Adenosine A2B receptors have been found to play an important role in the immune response to tumors as well as in inflammation and fibrosis. Similar to adenosine A2A receptors, adenosine binds to adenosine A2B receptors, which leads to immunosuppression. Preclinical models have shown that inhibition of A2B receptors prevented fibrosis. In 2018, we selected a development candidate for this program, a small molecule antagonist of the A2B receptor.

Manufacturing

We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for clinical testing, as well as for manufacture of any products that we may commercialize. We are able to internally produce small quantities of our product candidates required for relatively short preclinical animal studies. We believe that this allows us to accelerate the drug development process by not having to rely on third parties for all of our research and development needs. However, we currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on a number of contract manufacturers to produce sufficient quantities of our product candidates for use in more lengthy preclinical development and clinical trials and in relation to any future commercialization of our product candidates. Additional contract manufacturers are used to fill, label, package and distribute investigational drug products. This strategy allows us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure, avoid depending on our own manufacturing facility and equipment while simultaneously enabling us to focus our expertise on developing our products. Although we believe we have multiple potential sources for the manufacturing of our product candidates, we currently rely on several different manufacturers who supply different components of the CPI-818 and ciforadenant molecules, on one manufacturer for mupadolimab drug substance and other third-party manufacturers to produce our other product candidates.

Competition

The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by intense competition and rely heavily on the ability to move quickly, adapt to changing medical and market needs, and develop and maintain strong intellectual property positions. We believe that the development experience of our scientific and management teams, as well as the strength and promise of our product candidates, provides us with a competitive advantage; nevertheless, we face potential competition from myriad sources, including pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions.

Kyowa Hakko Kirin has approval in Japan and the United States for istradefylline, an A2A antagonist, in Parkinson’s disease. Within oncology, Novartis has announced an exclusive licensing agreement with Palobiofarma SL and is conducting a Phase 1 trial with an A2A antagonist. AstraZeneca plc is conducting clinical trials with an A2A antagonist for use in cancer therapy. Merck KgaA has entered into a pre-clinical collaboration with Domain Therapeutics Inc. to develop programs targeting the adenosine pathway. In addition, Redoxtherapies, which was acquired by Juno Therapeutics and subsequently by Celgene, and Arcus Biosciences are developing A2A receptor antagonists for cancer. Astra Zeneca, Bristol-Myers Squib, and Novartis, in partnership with Surface Oncology, have initiated clinical trials with anti-CD73 antibodies in cancer patients. Recently, Astra Zeneca reported positive results in a Phase 2 clinical trial in Stage 3 NSCLC with the combination of durvalumab and their anti CD73 antibody, oleclumab. More generally, in the field of immuno-oncology, there are large pharmaceutical companies with approved products or products in late-stage development that target other immune checkpoints, including PD-1, PD-L1 or CTLA-4. These companies include Bristol-Myers Squibb (nivolumab, ipilimumab), Merck (pembrolizumab), Genentech (atezolizumab)

Table of Contents

and AstraZeneca (durvalumab, tremelimumab). Janssen Pharmaceuticals and AbbVie are co-marketing Imbruvica (ibrutinib), which is a small molecule inhibitor of the kinase BTK that has also been reported to inhibit ITK.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to our business, including seeking, maintaining and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from our collaborators or other third parties. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing patent applications in the United States and in jurisdictions outside of the United States covering our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements and product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology and product candidates, continuing innovation, and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in the field of immuno-oncology. We also plan to rely on data exclusivity, market exclusivity, and patent term extensions when available. Our commercial success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our technology, inventions, and improvements; to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; to obtain and maintain licenses to use intellectual property owned by third parties; to defend and enforce our proprietary rights, including any patents that we may own in the future; and to operate without infringing on the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties.

We have in licensed patents and patent applications directed to certain of our product candidates and related uses thereof. We also possess and in license substantial know how and trade secrets relating to the development and commercialization of our product candidates, including related manufacturing processes and technology. As of January 20, 2023, our owned and licensed patent portfolio consisted of fifteen licensed U.S. issued patents, one licensed U.S. pending patent applications, eight owned U.S. issued patents, eight owned U.S. pending patent applications, one pending Patent Cooperation Treaty (“PCT”) application, and three owned U.S. provisional patent applications directed to CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab, and certain of our other proprietary technology, inventions, improvements or other potential product candidates. In addition, our owned and licensed patent portfolio included thirty-eight licensed patents, nine licensed patent applications, twenty-nine owned patents, and fifty-four owned patent applications pending in jurisdictions outside of the United States that are foreign counterparts to one or more of the foregoing U.S. patents and patent applications. The patents and patent applications outside of the United States in our portfolio are held primarily in Europe, Canada, Japan, Australia and China.

With respect to the immuno-oncology product candidates and processes we intend to develop and commercialize in the normal course of business, we intend to pursue patent protection covering, when possible, compositions, methods of use, dosing and formulations. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and drug development processes and technologies.

Issued patents can provide protection for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance, and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In general, patents issued for applications filed in the United States can provide exclusionary rights for 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. In addition, in certain instances, the term of an issued United States patent that covers or claims an FDA approved product can be extended to recapture a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period, which is called patent term extension. The restoration period cannot be longer than five years and the total patent term, including the restoration period, must not exceed 14 years following FDA approval. The term of patents outside of the United States varies in accordance with the laws of the foreign jurisdiction, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. The issued United States patents we license from Vernalis directed to the composition of matter of ciforadenant and its method of use for treating disorders treatable by purine receptor blocking are expected to expire between September 2028 and July 2029, excluding any patent term extension that may be available. The granted U.S. and foreign patents and pending U.S. and foreign patent application and PCT International patent applications, if granted as patents, that we own directed to the composition of matter and methods of treatment for mupadolimab are expected to expire between December 2036 and June 2037, excluding any patent term extension that may be available. The granted U.S. and foreign patents and pending U.S. and foreign patent applications, if granted as patents, that we own directed to the composition of matter and methods of treatment for CPI

Table of Contents

818 are expected to expire November 2037, excluding any patent term extension that may be available. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country, and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

The patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the scope of claims allowable in patents in the field of immuno-oncology has emerged in the United States. The relevant patent laws and their interpretation outside of the United States is also uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our technology or product candidates and enforce the patent rights that we license, and could affect the value of such intellectual property. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions, and improvements. With respect to both licensed and company-owned intellectual property, we cannot guarantee that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications we may file in the future, nor can we be sure that any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our products, the methods of use or manufacture of those products. Moreover, even the issued patents that we license do not guarantee us the right to practice our technology in relation to the commercialization of our products. Patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology space are evolving and involve many risks and uncertainties. For example, third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing our product candidates and practicing our proprietary technology, and the issued patents that we in-license and those that may issue in the future may be challenged, invalidated, or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related products or could limit the term of patent protection that otherwise may exist for our product candidates. In addition, the scope of the rights granted under any issued patents may not provide us with protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar technology. Furthermore, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies that are outside the scope of the rights granted under any issued patents that we own or exclusively in-license. For these reasons, we may face competition with respect to our product candidates. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of a potential product, it is possible that, before any particular product candidate can be commercialized, any patent protection for such product may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the commercial advantage the patent provides.

Licenses and Collaborations

Vernalis Licensing Agreement

In February 2015, we entered into a license agreement with Vernalis, pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive, worldwide license under certain patent rights and know-how, including a limited right to grant sublicenses, for all fields of use to develop, manufacture and commercialize products containing certain adenosine receptor antagonists, including ciforadenant. The issued U.S. patents that we in-licensed from Vernalis pursuant to this agreement are directed to the composition of matter of ciforadenant and its method of use for treating disorders treatable by purine receptor blocking and are expected to expire between September 2028 and July 2029, excluding any patent term extension that may be available. Vernalis has the first right to prosecute and maintain the licensed patent rights worldwide, subject to our right with respect to certain of the licensed patents to continue prosecution and maintenance if Vernalis elects not to do so. We also have the right to prosecute and maintain any patent rights that we may own that cover the licensed compounds that do not fall within the licensed patent rights. Pursuant to this agreement, we are required to use commercially reasonable efforts to conduct certain activities to obtain marketing authorizations for licensed products and to conduct certain preclinical and clinical studies for ciforadenant. We also must use commercially reasonable efforts to conduct certain preclinical and clinical studies to support the use of ciforadenant as an immunotherapeutic agent for cancer studies, and to meet certain specified development, regulatory and commercial milestones within specified time periods.

Pursuant to this agreement, we made a one-time cash payment to Vernalis in the amount of $1.0 million upon entering into the agreement. We are also required to make cash milestone payments to Vernalis upon the successful

Table of Contents

completion of clinical and regulatory milestones for licensed products depending on the indications for which such licensed products are developed and upon achievement of certain sales milestones. In February 2017, we made a milestone payment of $3 million to Vernalis following the expansion of a cohort of patients with renal cell cancer treated with single-agent ciforadenant in our Phase 1/1b clinical trial. During the year ended December 31, 2022, no clinical or regulatory milestones were completed or paid to Vernalis and the aggregate potential milestone payments were approximately $220 million for all indications as of December 31, 2022.

We have also agreed to pay Vernalis tiered incremental royalties based on the annual net sales of licensed products containing ciforadenant on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis, subject to certain offsets and reductions. The tiered royalty rates for products containing ciforadenant range from the mid-single digits up to the low-double digits on a country-by-country net sales basis. The royalties on other licensed products that do not include ciforadenant also increase with the amount of net sales on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis and range from the low-single digits up to the mid-single digits on a country-by-country net sales basis.

The agreement will expire on a product-by-product and country-by-country basis upon the expiration of our payment obligations to Vernalis in respect of a particular product and country. Both parties have the right to terminate the agreement in the event of an uncured material breach by the other party. We may also terminate the agreement at our convenience by providing 90 days written notice, provided that we have not received notice of our own default under the agreement at the time we exercise such termination right. Vernalis may also terminate the agreement if we challenge a licensed patent or undergo a bankruptcy event.

Scripps Licensing Agreement

In December 2014, we entered into a license agreement with Scripps, pursuant to which we were granted a non-exclusive, world-wide license for all fields of use under Scripps’ rights in certain know-how and technology related to a mouse hybridoma clone expressing an anti-human CD73 antibody, and to progeny, mutants or unmodified derivatives of such hybridoma and any antibodies expressed by such hybridoma, from which we developed mupadolimab. Scripps also granted us the right to grant sublicenses in conjunction with other proprietary rights we hold, or to others collaborating with or performing services for us. Under this license agreement, Scripps has agreed not to grant any additional commercial licenses with respect to such materials, other than march-in rights granted to the U.S. government.

Upon execution of the agreement, we made a one-time cash payment to Scripps of $10,000 and are also obligated to pay a minimum annual fee to Scripps of $25,000. The first minimum annual fee payment is due on the first anniversary of the effective date of the agreement and will be due on each subsequent anniversary of the effective date for the term of the agreement. We are also required to make performance-based cash payments upon successful completion of clinical and sales milestones. The aggregate potential milestone payments are $2.6 million. We are also required to pay royalties on net sales of licensed products (including mupadolimab) sold by us, our affiliates and our sublicensees at a rate in the low-single digits. In addition, should we sublicense the rights licensed under the agreement, we have agreed to pay a percentage of sublicense revenue received at single digit percentages based on the achievement of development milestones.

Our license agreement with Scripps will terminate upon expiration of our obligation to pay royalties to Scripps under the license agreement. The license agreement is terminable by the consent of the parties, at will by us or upon providing 90 days written notice to Scripps, or by Scripps for certain material breaches by us, or if we undergo a bankruptcy event. In addition, Scripps may terminate our license on a product-by-product basis, or the entire agreement, if we fail to meet specified diligence obligations related to the development and commercialization of licensed products. Scripps may also terminate the agreement after the third anniversary of the effective date of the agreement if it reasonably believes, based on reports we provide to Scripps, that we have not used commercially reasonable efforts as required under the agreement, subject to a specified notice and cure period.

Table of Contents

Monash License Agreement

In April 2017, we entered into a license agreement with Monash University (“Monash”), pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive, sublicensable worldwide license under certain know-how, patent rights and other intellectual property rights controlled by Monash to research, develop, and commercialize certain antibodies directed to CXCR2 for the treatment of human diseases.

Upon execution of the agreement, we made a one-time cash payment to Monash of $275,000 and reimbursed Monash for certain patent prosecution costs incurred prior to execution of the agreement. We are also obligated to pay an annual license maintenance fee to Monash of $25,000 until a certain development milestone is met with respect to the licensed product, after which no further maintenance fee will be due. We are also required to make development and sales milestone payments to Monash with respect to the licensed products. During the year ended December 31, 2022, no development or sales milestones were completed or paid to Monash and the aggregate potential milestones were $45.1 million as of December 31, 2022. We are also required to pay to Monash tiered royalties on net sales of licensed products sold by us, our affiliates and our sublicensees at a rate ranging in the low-single digits. In addition, should we sublicense our rights under the agreement, we have agreed to pay a percentage of sublicense revenue received at specified rates that are currently at low double digit percentages and decrease to single digit percentages based on the achievement of development milestones.

The term of our agreement with Monash continues until the expiration of our obligation to pay royalties to Monash thereunder. The license agreement is terminable at will by us upon providing 30 days written notice to Monash, or by either party for material breaches by the other party. In addition, Monash may terminate the entire agreement or convert the license to a non-exclusive license if we have materially breached our obligation to use commercially reasonable efforts to develop and commercialize a licensed product, subject to a specified notice and cure mechanism.

Regulation

Government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, marketing and export and import of products such as those we are developing. A new drug must be approved by the FDA through the New Drug Application (“NDA”) process and a new biologic must be approved by the FDA through the Biologics License Application (“BLA”) process before it may be legally marketed in the United States.

United States Drug Development Process

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”), and in the case of biologics, also under the Public Health Service Act (“PHSA”), and their implementing regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement or civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us.

The process required by the FDA before a drug or biologic may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

Table of Contents

● satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable;

Once a pharmaceutical candidate is identified for development, it enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, to the FDA as part of the IND. The sponsor will also include a protocol detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety, and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated, if the clinical trial lends itself to an efficacy evaluation. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30 day time period, places the clinical trial on a clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. Clinical holds also may be imposed by the FDA at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns about on going or proposed clinical trials or non compliance with specific FDA requirements, and the trials may not begin or continue until the FDA notifies the sponsor that the hold has been lifted. While the IND is active, each protocol or protocol amendment must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND, progress reports summarizing the results of the clinical trials and nonclinical studies performed since the last progress report, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and investigators for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the same or similar drugs, findings from animal or in vitro testing suggesting a significant risk to humans, and any clinically important increased incidence of a serious suspected adverse reaction compared to that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure.

All clinical trials must be conducted under the supervision of one or more qualified investigators in accordance with GCP regulations. Furthermore, an IRB at each institution participating in the clinical trial must review and approve each protocol before a clinical trial commences at that institution and must also approve the information regarding the trial and the consent form that must be provided to each trial subject or his or her legal representative, monitor the study until completed and otherwise comply with IRB regulations. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. In addition, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. Depending on its charter, this group may determine whether a trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial.

Table of Contents

Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA or BLA.

The FDA or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. In addition, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. Depending on its charter, this group may determine whether a trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial.

During the development of a new drug or biologic, sponsors are given opportunities to meet with the FDA at certain points. These points may be prior to submission of an IND, at the end of Phase 2, and before an NDA or BLA is submitted. Meetings at other times may be requested. These meetings can provide an opportunity for the sponsor to share information about the data gathered to date, for the FDA to provide advice, and for the sponsor and the FDA to reach agreement on the next phase of development. Sponsors typically use the meetings at the end of the Phase 2 trial to discuss Phase 2 clinical results and present plans for the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial that they believe will support approval of the new drug or biologic.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug and finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the manufacturer must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug. In addition, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed trial results to public registries. Sponsors of certain clinical trials of FDA-regulated products are required to register and disclose specified clinical trial information, which is publicly available at www.clinicaltrials.gov.

United States Review and Approval Process

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, preclinical and other non-clinical studies and clinical trials, along with descriptions of the manufacturing process, analytical tests conducted on the chemistry of the drug, proposed labeling and

Table of Contents

other relevant information are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA or BLA requesting approval to market the product. The submission of an NDA or BLA is subject to the payment of user fees; a waiver of such fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews all NDAs and BLAs submitted to ensure that they are sufficiently complete for substantive review before it accepts them for filing. The FDA may request additional information rather than accept an NDA or BLA for filing. In this event, the NDA or BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application also is subject to review before the FDA accepts it for filing.

Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in depth substantive review. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe and effective for its intended use and whether its manufacturing is cGMP compliant to assure and preserve the product’s identity, strength, quality and purity. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things whether the product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA may refer the NDA or BLA to an advisory committee for review, evaluation and recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.

After the FDA evaluates an NDA or BLA, it will issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application will not be approved in its present form. A Complete Response Letter usually describes the specific deficiencies in the NDA or BLA identified by the FDA and may require additional clinical data, such as an additional clinical trial or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, nonclinical studies or manufacturing. If a Complete Response Letter is issued, the sponsor must resubmit the NDA or BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the NDA or BLA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. If a product receives regulatory approval, the approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. In addition, the FDA may require a sponsor to conduct Phase 4 testing, which involves clinical trials designed to further assess a drug’s safety and effectiveness after NDA or BLA approval, and may require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products which have been commercialized. The FDA may also place other conditions on approval including the requirement for a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”) to assure the safe use of the drug. If the FDA concludes a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the NDA must submit a proposed REMS. The FDA will not approve the NDA without an approved REMS, if required. A REMS could include medication guides, physician communication plans or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Any of these limitations on approval or marketing could restrict the commercial promotion, distribution, prescription or dispensing of products. Marketing approval may be withdrawn for non-compliance with regulatory requirements or if problems occur following initial marketing.

In addition, the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), which requires a sponsor to conduct pediatric clinical trials for most drugs and biologics, for a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration. Under PREA, original NDAs, BLAs and supplements thereto must contain a pediatric assessment unless the sponsor has received a deferral or waiver. The required assessment must evaluate the safety and effectiveness of the product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe and effective. The sponsor or FDA may request a deferral of pediatric clinical trials for some or all of the pediatric subpopulations. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the drug or biologic is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric clinical trials are complete or that additional safety or effectiveness data needs to be collected before the pediatric clinical trials begin. The FDA must send a non-compliance letter to any sponsor that fails to submit the required assessment, keep a deferral current or fails to submit a request for approval of a pediatric formulation.

Table of Contents

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or, if it affects more than 200,000 individuals in the United States, there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug or biologic product available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. Orphan designation must be requested before submitting an NDA or BLA. After the FDA grants orphan designation, the identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process.

If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug or biological product for the same disease or condition for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity or inability to manufacture the product in sufficient quantities. The designation of such drug or biologic also entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user fee waivers. However, competitors may receive approval of different products for the disease or condition for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same product but for a different disease or condition for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan exclusivity also could block the approval of a product candidate for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same drug or biologic as defined by the FDA or if such product candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s product for the same condition or disease. If an orphan designated product receives marketing approval for a disease or condition broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan exclusivity.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA has a Fast Track program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing product candidates that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs and biologics are eligible for Fast Track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and nonclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the disease or condition. Fast Track designation applies to the combination of the product candidate and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The FDA may consider for review sections of the NDA or BLA for a Fast Track review designation on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA or BLA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA or BLA and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA or BLA.

A product candidate intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition may also be eligible for Breakthrough Therapy designation to expedite its development and review. A product candidate can receive Breakthrough Therapy designation if preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product candidate, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. The designation includes all of the fast track program features, as well as more intensive FDA interaction and guidance beginning as early as Phase 1 and an organizational commitment to expedite the development and review of the product candidate, including involvement of senior managers.

Any product candidate submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product candidate with a Fast Track designation or Breakthrough Therapy designation, may also be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. A BLA or NDA is eligible for priority review if the product candidate is designed to treat a serious condition, and if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness compared to marketed products. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. The FDA endeavors to review applications with priority review designations within six months of the filing date as compared to ten months for review of original BLAs and new molecular entity NDAs under its standard review goals.

Table of Contents

In addition, a product candidate may be eligible for accelerated approval. Drug and biologic product candidates intended to treat serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions may be eligible for accelerated approval upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug or biologic receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled confirmatory clinical trials. A product receiving accelerated approval may be subjected to expedited withdrawal procedures if the sponsor fails to conduct any required confirmatory trials in a timely manner, or if such trials fail to verify the predicted clinical benefit. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, priority review and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Post-approval requirements

Once an approval is granted, the FDA may withdraw the approval if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product may result in restrictions on the product or even complete withdrawal of the product from the market. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, certain manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further FDA review and approval. Drug and biologics manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs and biologics are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP regulations and other laws and regulations.

Any drug products manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals will be subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse experiences with the drug, providing the FDA with updated safety and efficacy information, drug sampling and distribution requirements, complying with certain electronic records and signature requirements, and complying with FDA promotion and advertising requirements. The FDA strictly regulates labeling, advertising, promotion and other types of information on products that are placed on the market and imposes requirements and restrictions on drug and biologics manufacturers, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Discovery of previously unknown problems or the failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements may result in restrictions on the marketing of a product or withdrawal of the product from the market as well as possible civil or criminal sanctions. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions and adverse publicity. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties.

Marketing Exclusivity

Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA can also delay the submission or the approval of certain marketing applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent data exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to obtain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve or even accept

Table of Contents

for review an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”) or a NDA submitted under Section 505(b)(2), or 505(b)(2) NDA, submitted by another company for another drug based on the same active moiety, regardless of whether the drug is intended for the same indication as the original innovative drug or for another indication, where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement to one of the patents listed with the FDA by the innovator NDA holder. The FDCA alternatively provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the modification for which the drug received approval on the basis of the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs or 505(b)(2) NDAs for drugs containing the active agent for the original indication or condition of use. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness.

Pediatric exclusivity is a type of marketing exclusivity available in the United States. Pediatric exclusivity under the Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act provides for an additional six months of marketing exclusivity if a sponsor conducts clinical trials in children in response to a written request from the FDA. If such written request does not include clinical trials in neonates, the FDA is required to include its rationale for not requesting those clinical trials. The FDA may request studies on approved or unapproved indications in separate written requests. The issuance of a written request does not require the sponsor to undertake the described clinical trials. In addition, orphan drug exclusivity, as described above, may offer a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity, except in certain circumstances.

Biosimilars and Exclusivity

The Affordable Care Act includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (“BPCIA”), which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. The FDA has issued several guidance documents outlining an approach to review and approval of biosimilars.

Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical study or studies. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic.

Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until twelve years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this twelve-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed “interchangeable” by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law.

FDA Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

We expect that certain of our product candidates may require an in vitro diagnostic to identify appropriate patient populations for our product candidates. These diagnostics, often referred to as companion diagnostics, are regulated as medical devices. In the United States, the FDCA and its implementing regulations, and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, medical device design and development, preclinical and

Table of Contents

clinical testing, premarket clearance or approval, registration and listing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, advertising and promotion, sales and distribution, export and import, and post-market surveillance. Unless an exemption applies, diagnostic tests require marketing clearance or approval from the FDA prior to commercial distribution. The two primary types of FDA marketing authorization applicable to a medical device are premarket notification, also called 510(k) clearance, and premarket approval (“PMA”). We expect that any companion diagnostic developed for our product candidates will utilize the PMA pathway.

If use of companion diagnostic is essential to safe and effective use of a drug or biologic product, then the FDA generally will require approval or clearance of the diagnostic contemporaneously with the approval of the therapeutic product. On August 6, 2014, the FDA issued a final guidance document addressing the development and approval process for “In Vitro Companion Diagnostic Devices.” According to the guidance, for novel product candidates, a companion diagnostic device and its corresponding drug candidate should be approved or cleared contemporaneously by FDA for the use indicated in the therapeutic product labeling. The guidance also explains that a companion diagnostic device used to make treatment decisions in clinical trials of a drug generally will be considered an investigational device, unless it is employed for an intended use for which the device is already approved or cleared. If used to make critical treatment decisions, such as patient selection, the diagnostic device generally will be considered a significant risk device under the FDA’s Investigational Device Exemption (“IDE”) regulations. Thus, the sponsor of the diagnostic device will be required to comply with the IDE regulations. According to the guidance, if a diagnostic device and a drug are to be studied together to support their respective approvals, both products can be studied in the same investigational study, if the study meets both the requirements of the IDE regulations and the IND regulations. The guidance provides that depending on the details of the study plan and subjects, a sponsor may seek to submit an IND alone, or both an IND and an IDE.

The FDA has generally required companion diagnostics intended to select the patients who will respond to cancer treatment to obtain approval of a PMA for that diagnostic simultaneously with approval of the therapeutic. The PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and preclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. It involves a rigorous premarket review during which the applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness and information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. In addition, PMAs for certain devices must generally include the results from extensive preclinical and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the device for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. In particular, for a diagnostic, the applicant must demonstrate that the diagnostic produces reproducible results when the same sample is tested multiple times by multiple users at multiple laboratories. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality System Regulation (“QSR”),which imposes elaborate testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements.

If the FDA evaluations of both the PMA application and the manufacturing facilities are favorable, the FDA will either issue an approval letter or an approvable letter, which usually contains a number of conditions that must be met in order to secure the final approval of the PMA, such as changes in labeling, or specific additional information, such as submission of final labeling, in order to secure final approval of the PMA. If the FDA concludes that the applicable criteria have been met, the FDA will issue a PMA for the approved indications, which can be more limited than those originally sought by the applicant. The PMA can include post-approval conditions that the FDA believes necessary to ensure the safety and effectiveness of the device, including, among other things, restrictions on labeling, promotion, sale and distribution.

If the FDA’s evaluation of the PMA or manufacturing facilities is not favorable, the FDA will deny approval of the PMA or issue a not approvable letter. A not approvable letter will outline the deficiencies in the application and, where practical, will identify what is necessary to make the PMA approvable. The FDA may also determine that additional clinical trials are necessary, in which case the PMA approval may be delayed for several months or years while the trials are conducted and then the data submitted in an amendment to the PMA. Once granted, PMA approval may be withdrawn by the FDA if compliance with post approval requirements, conditions of approval or other regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing. PMA approval is not guaranteed, and the FDA may ultimately respond to a PMA submission with a not approvable determination based on

Table of Contents

deficiencies in the application and require additional clinical trial or other data that may be expensive and time-consuming to generate and that can substantially delay approval.

After a device is placed on the market, it remains subject to significant regulatory requirements. Medical devices may be marketed only for the uses and indications for which they are cleared or approved. Device manufacturers must also establish registration and device listings with the FDA. A medical device manufacturer’s manufacturing processes and those of its suppliers are required to comply with the applicable portions of the QSR, which cover the methods and documentation of the design, testing, production, processes, controls, quality assurance, labeling, packaging and shipping of medical devices. Domestic facility records and manufacturing processes are subject to periodic unscheduled inspections by the FDA. The FDA also may inspect foreign facilities that export products to the United States.

Government Regulation Outside of the United States

In addition to regulations in the United States, we are subject to a variety of regulations in other jurisdictions governing, among other things, clinical trials, and any commercial sales and distribution of our product once approved.

Whether or not we obtain FDA approval for a product candidate, we must obtain the requisite approvals from regulatory authorities in foreign countries prior to the commencement of clinical trials or marketing of the product candidates in those countries. The requirements and process governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. Failure to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.

Non-Clinical Studies and Clinical Trials

Similar to the U.S., the various phases of non-clinical and clinical research in the European Union (“EU”) are subject to significant regulatory controls.

Non-clinical studies are performed to demonstrate the health or environmental safety of new chemical or biological substances. Non-clinical (pharmaco-toxicological) studies must be conducted in compliance with the principles of good laboratory practice (“GLP”) as set forth in EU Directive 2004/10/EC (unless otherwise justified for certain particular medicinal products – e.g., radio-pharmaceutical precursors for radio-labelling purposes). In particular, non-clinical studies, both in vitro and in vivo, must be planned, performed, monitored, recorded, reported and archived in accordance with the GLP principles, which define a set of rules and criteria for a quality system for the organizational process and the conditions for non-clinical studies. These GLP standards reflect the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development requirements.

Certain countries outside of the United States have a similar process that requires the submission of a clinical study application much like the IND prior to the commencement of human clinical studies.

Clinical studies of medicinal products in the EU must be conducted in accordance with EU and national regulations and the International Conference on Harmonization (“ICH”) guidelines on GCP as well as the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki. If the sponsor of the clinical trial is not established within the EU, it must appoint an EU entity to act as its legal representative. The sponsor must take out a clinical trial insurance policy, and in most EU member states, the sponsor is liable to provide ‘no fault’ compensation to any study subject injured in the clinical trial.

The regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU has been subject to recent changes. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. Unlike directives, the CTR is directly applicable in all EU member states without the need for member states to further implement it into national law. The CTR notably harmonizes the assessment and supervision processes for clinical trials throughout the EU via a Clinical Trials Information System, which contains a centralized EU portal and database.

Table of Contents

While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application (“CTA”) to be submitted in each member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, much like the FDA and IRB respectively, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The CTA must include, among other things, a copy of the trial protocol and an investigational medicinal product dossier containing information about the manufacture and quality of the medicinal product under investigation. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed.

The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. Clinical trials for which an application was submitted (i) prior to January 31, 2022 under the Clinical Trials Directive, or (ii) between January 31, 2022 and January 31, 2023 and for which the sponsor has opted for the application of the Clinical Trials Directive remain governed by said Directive until January 31, 2025. After this date, all clinical trials (including those which are ongoing) will become subject to the provisions of the CTR.

Medicines used in clinical trials must be manufactured in accordance with Good Manufacturing Practices (“GMP”). Other national and EU-wide regulatory requirements may also apply.

Marketing Authorization

In the EU, medicinal products can only be placed on the market after obtaining a marketing authorization (“MA”). To obtain regulatory approval of an investigational medicinal product under EU regulatory systems, we must submit a MA application (“MAA”). The process for doing this depends, among other things, on the nature of the medicinal product.

“Centralized MAs” are issued by the European Commission through the centralized procedure, based on the opinion of the European Medicines Agency’s (“EMA”) Committee for Human Medicinal Products (“CHMP”) and are valid across the entire territory of the EU. The centralized procedure is compulsory for human types of medicines such as: (i) medicinal products derived from biotechnology processes, such as genetic engineering, (ii) medicinal products that contain a new active substance indicated for the treatment of certain diseases, such as HIV/AIDS, cancer, diabetes, neurodegenerative diseases, autoimmune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases, (iii) designated orphan medicines and (iv) advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”), such as gene therapy, somatic cell therapy or tissue-engineered medicines. The centralized procedure may at the request of the applicant also be used in certain other cases and in particular for any other products containing new active substances not authorized in the EU or for product candidates which constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific, or technical innovation or for which the granting of authorization would be in the interests of public health in the EU. It is likely that the centralized procedure would apply to the product candidates we are developing.

Under the centralized procedure, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of a MAA by the EMA is 210 days. In exceptional cases, the CHMP might perform an accelerated review of a MA in no more than 150 days (not including clock stops). Innovative products that target an unmet medical need and are expected to be of major public health interest may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the PRIME scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicines that target unmet medical needs. It is based on increased interaction and early dialogue with companies developing promising medicines, to optimize their product development plans and speed up their evaluation to help them reach patients earlier. Product developers that benefit from PRIME designation can expect to be eligible for accelerated assessment but this is not guaranteed. Many benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted. Importantly, a dedicated contact and rapporteur from the CHMP is appointed early in the PRIME scheme facilitating increased understanding of the product at EMA’s

Table of Contents

committee level. An initial meeting initiates these relationships and includes a team of multidisciplinary experts at the EMA to provide guidance on the overall development and regulatory strategies.

MAs have an initial duration of five years. After these five years, the authorization may be renewed for an unlimited period on the basis of a reevaluation of the risk-benefit balance.

Data and Marketing Exclusivity

The EU also provides opportunities for market exclusivity. Upon receiving MA, reference products generally receive eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. If granted, data exclusivity prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from relying on the preclinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar MA in the EU during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. During the additional two year period of market exclusivity, a generic or biosimilar MAA can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic or biosimilar product can be marketed until 10 years have elapsed from the initial MA of the reference product in the EU. The overall ten-year market exclusivity period may be extended to a maximum of eleven years if, during the first eight years of those 10 years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indication with significant clinical benefit over existing therapies is approved. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EU’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity.

There is a special regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet the definition of a generic medicinal product, for example, because of differences in raw materials or manufacturing processes. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided, and guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product. There are no such guidelines for complex biological products, such as gene or cell therapy medicinal products, and so it is unlikely that biosimilars of those products will currently be approved in the EU. However, guidance from the EMA states that they will be considered in the future in light of the scientific knowledge and regulatory experience gained at the time.

Orphan Medicinal Products

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the EU are similar in principle to those in the United States. A medicinal product may be designated as orphan if its sponsor can establish that: (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify investment; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition.

The application for orphan designation must be submitted before the MAA. Orphan medicinal products are eligible for incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized procedure and are, upon grant of a MA, entitled to ten years of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. During the ten-year market exclusivity period, the regulatory authorities cannot accept another MAA, or grant a MA, or accept an application to extend an existing MA for a period of ten years for the same indication, in respect of a similar medicinal product. An orphan product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the EU for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed pediatric investigation plan (“PIP”). No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

The 10-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example, if the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold.

Table of Contents

In addition, MA may be granted to a similar product for the same indication at any time if (1) the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior; (2) the applicant consents to a second orphan medicinal product application; or (3) the applicant cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product.

Pediatric Development

In the EU, MAAs for new medicinal products have to include the results of trials conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a PIP agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee (“PDCO”). The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the drug for which an MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures of the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data are not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Once the MA is obtained in all member states and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for a six-months supplementary protection certificate extension (if any is in effect at the time of approval) or, in the case of orphan pharmaceutical products, a two year extension of the orphan market exclusivity is granted.

Post-Approval Requirements

Similar to the United States, both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the member states. The holder of a MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance (“QPPV”) who is responsible for the establishment and maintenance of that system, and oversees the safety profiles of medicinal products and any emerging safety concerns. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports (“PSURs”).

All new MAAs must include a risk management plan (“RMP”), describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Such risk-minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies.

The advertising and promotion of medicinal products is also subject to laws concerning promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. All advertising and promotional activities for the product must be consistent with the approved summary of product characteristics, and therefore all off-label promotion is prohibited. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is also prohibited in the EU. Although general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products are established under EU directives, the details are governed by regulations in each member state and can differ from one country to another.

Failure to comply with EU and member state laws that apply to the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing approval, MA of medicinal products and marketing of such products, both before and after grant of the MA, manufacturing of pharmaceutical products, statutory health insurance, bribery and anti-corruption or with other applicable regulatory requirements may result in administrative, civil or criminal penalties. These penalties could include delays or refusal to authorize the conduct of clinical trials, or to grant MAs, product withdrawals and recalls, product seizures, suspension, withdrawal or variation of the MA, total or partial suspension of production, distribution, manufacturing or clinical trials, operating restrictions, injunctions, suspension of licenses, fines and criminal penalties.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the European Economic Area (“EEA”), which consists of the 27 EU member states plus Norway, Liechtenstein and Iceland.

Table of Contents

For other countries outside of the EU, such as countries in Eastern Europe, Latin America or Asia, the requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary from country to country. In all cases, again, the clinical trials are conducted in accordance with GCP and the applicable regulatory requirements and the ethical principles that have their origin in the Declaration of Helsinki.

If we fail to comply with applicable foreign regulatory requirements, we may be subject to, among other things, fines, suspension or withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution.

Regulation of Companion Diagnostics

In the EU, in vitro diagnostic medical devices were regulated by Directive 98/79/EC which regulated the placing on the market, the CE marking, the essential requirements, the conformity assessment procedures, the registration obligations for manufacturers and devices as well as the vigilance procedure. In vitro diagnostic medical devices had to comply with the requirements provided for in the Directive, and with further requirements implemented at national level (as the case may be).

The regulation of companion diagnostics is subject to further requirements since the in-vitro medical diagnostic devices Regulation (No 2017/746) (“IVDR”) became applicable on 26 May 2022. However, on October 14, 2021, the European Commission proposed a “progressive” roll-out of the IVDR to prevent disruption in the supply of in vitro diagnostic medical devices. The European Parliament and Council voted to adopt the proposed regulation on December 15, 2021 and the regulation entered into force on January 2022. The IVDR fully applies since May 26, 2022 but there is a tiered system extending the grace period for many devices (depending on their risk classification) before they have to be fully compliant with the regulation.

The IVDR introduces a new classification system for companion diagnostics which are now specifically defined as diagnostic tests that support the safe and effective use of a specific medicinal product, by identifying patients that are suitable or unsuitable for treatment. Companion diagnostics will have to undergo a conformity assessment by a notified body. Before it can issue an EU certificate, the notified body must seek a scientific opinion from the EMA on the suitability of the companion diagnostic to the medicinal product concerned if the medicinal product falls exclusively within the scope of the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicines, or the medicinal product is already authorized through the centralized procedure, or a MMA for the medicinal product has been submitted through the centralized procedure. For other substances, the notified body can seek the opinion from a national competent authorities or the EMA.

The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA.

Other Healthcare Laws

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical and biological products, other U.S. federal and state and foreign healthcare regulatory laws restrict business practices in the pharmaceutical industry, which include, but are not limited to, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud & abuse, false claims, consumer fraud and transparency laws regarding drug pricing and payments or other transfers of value made to physicians and other licensed healthcare professionals. These laws may affect our sales, marketing and other promotional activities by limiting the kinds of financial arrangements we may have with physicians, customers and third party payors including discount practices, customer support, education and training programs, physician consulting and other service arrangements. In addition, manufacturers can be held liable under the False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers or promoting a product off label. These laws are broadly written, and it is often difficult to determine precisely how these laws will be applied to specific circumstances. Such laws include:

Table of Contents

To the extent that any of our product candidates, once approved, are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws and regulations, which may include, for instance, applicable post-marketing requirements, including safety surveillance, anti-fraud and abuse laws, and implementation of corporate compliance programs and reporting of payments or other transfers of value to healthcare professionals.

Violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply could result in significant penalties, including, without limitation, administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, the curtailment or restructuring of operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and individual imprisonment.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any pharmaceutical or biological product for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and markets in other countries, patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers performing the prescribed services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our products. Sales of any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will therefore depend, in part, on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors. Third- party payors include government authorities, managed care plans, private health insurers and other organizations.

Table of Contents

The process for determining whether a third-party payor will provide coverage for a pharmaceutical or biological product typically is separate from the process for setting the price of such product or for establishing the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product once coverage is approved. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, also known as a formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover our product candidates could reduce physician utilization of our products once approved and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. Moreover, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a pharmaceutical or biological product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. In addition, coverage and reimbursement for new products can differ significantly from payor to payor. One third-party payor’s decision to cover a particular medical product or service does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage for the medical product or service, or will provide coverage at an adequate reimbursement rate. As a result, the coverage determination process will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately and will be a time consuming process.

The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments, and the prices of pharmaceutical or biological products have been a focus in this effort. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of pharmaceutical products, biological products, medical devices and medical services, in addition to questioning safety and efficacy. If these third-party payors do not consider our product candidates to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover our products after FDA approval or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow us to sell our products at a profit.

Healthcare Reform

A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and other third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medical products. For example, in March 2010, the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, was enacted, which, among other things, increased the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by most manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program; introduced a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; extended the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to utilization of prescriptions of individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care plans; imposed mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries as a condition for manufacturers’ outpatient drugs coverage under Medicare Part D; subjected drug manufacturers to new annual fees based on pharmaceutical companies’ share of sales to federal healthcare programs, and created a new Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional legislative challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA.

In addition, the Budget Control Act of 2011 and due to subsequent legislative amendments included, among other things, aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers that will remain in effect through 2032, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from

Table of Contents

three to five years. In addition, in March 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, beginning January 1, 2024.

Moreover, there has recently been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted legislation designed, among other things, to bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products. On August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023), and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. For that and other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated. In addition, individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures and, in some cases, mechanisms to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third party payors and governmental authorities in reference pricing systems and publication of discounts and list prices.

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

In the future, there may continue to be additional proposals relating to the reform of the U.S. healthcare system and international healthcare systems. We expect that additional state, federal and foreign healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal, state and foreign governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our product candidates.

Data Privacy and Security

Numerous state, federal and foreign laws, including consumer protection laws and regulations, govern the collection, dissemination, use, access to, confidentiality and security of personal information, including health-related information. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws, including HIPAA, and federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations (e.g., Section 5 of the FTC Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. In addition, certain state and non-U.S. laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act, or the CCPA, the California Privacy Rights Act, or the CPRA, and the EU General Data Protection Regulation, or the GDPR, govern the privacy and security of personal information, including health-related information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than

Table of Contents

HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing.

Research and Development Expenses

Our research and development expenses were $24.4 million, $29.1 million and $31.8 million for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021, and 2020, respectively. Please see “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations-Research and Development Expenses” for additional detail regarding our research and development activities.

Environment

Our third-party manufacturers are subject to inspections by the FDA for compliance with cGMP and other U.S. regulatory requirements, including U.S. federal, state and local regulations regarding environmental protection and hazardous and controlled substance controls, among others. Environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent over time. We have incurred, and may continue to incur, significant expenditures to ensure we are in compliance with these laws and regulations. We would be subject to significant penalties for failure to comply with these laws and regulations.

Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2022, we had 29 total employees, all of whom were full-time and 22 of whom were primarily engaged in research and development activities.

Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and additional employees. We strive to attract and retain the most talented employees in the industry by offering competitive compensation and benefits that support their health, financial and emotional well-being. The principal purposes of our compensation plans are to attract, retain and motivate selected employees and directors. We use a combination of fixed and variable compensation including base salary, cash-based performance bonuses and stock-based compensation awards.

Facilities

We currently lease a total of approximately 27,280 square feet of office and research and development facilities in Burlingame, California. 7,585 square feet was subleased to Angel Pharmaceuticals through January 2023. Our lease expires in 2025. We regularly explore alternatives which would provide us with additional space to accommodate our anticipated growth.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated in Delaware on January 27, 2014 and began operations in November 2014. Our principal executive offices are located at 863 Mitten Road, Suite 102, Burlingame, California 94010, and our telephone number is (650) 900 4520. Our website address is http://www.corvuspharma.com. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference in this Annual Report on Form 10 K or in any other filings we make with the SEC.

We are a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act. We take advantage of certain of the scaled disclosures available to smaller reporting companies and will be able to take advantage of these scaled disclosures for so long as the market value of our voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter, or our annual revenue is less than $100 million

Table of Contents

during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter.

Financial Information about Segments

We view our operations and manage our business as one reportable segment. See Note 2 to our audited consolidated financial statements included in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Additional information required by this item is incorporated herein by reference to Part II, Item 6, “Selected Financial Data.”

Available Information

We file electronically with the SEC our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q and current reports on Form 8-K pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended. We make available on our website at http://www.corvuspharma.com, free of charge, copies of these reports, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. The public may read or copy any materials we file with the SEC. The SEC maintains a website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that website is www.sec.gov. The information on or accessible through the SEC and our website is not incorporated into, and is not considered part of, this filing. Further, our references to the URLs for these websites are intended to be inactive textual references only.

Item 1A.

Risk Factors

Our business involves significant risks, some of which are described below. You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described below, together with all of the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our audited consolidated financial statements and related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” If any of the following risks are realized, our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. Many of the following risks and uncertainties are, and will be, exacerbated by the COVID-19 pandemic and any worsening of the global business and economic environment as a result. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations.

Risks Related to Our Limited Operating History, Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We may never generate any revenue or become profitable or, if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain it.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company that has never generated revenue from the sale of our product candidates. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. To date, we have focused primarily on developing our lead product candidates, CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab, and researching additional product candidates. We have incurred significant operating losses since we were founded in January 2014 and have not yet generated any revenue from sales. If our product candidates are not approved, we may never generate any revenue. We incurred a net loss of $41.3 million, $43.2 million and $6.0 million for the years ended December 31, 2022, 2021 and 2020, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit of $307.7 million as of December 31, 2022. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase as we continue our development of, seek regulatory approval for and, if approved, begin to commercialize CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab, and as we develop other product candidates. Even if we achieve profitability in the future, we may not be able to sustain it in subsequent periods. Our prior losses, combined

Table of Contents

with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and results of operations.

We will require substantial additional financing to achieve our goals, and a failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development, other operations or commercialization efforts.

Since our inception, the majority of our efforts have been focused on the research and development of CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab. We believe that we will continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future as we continue clinical development of, seek regulatory approval for and, if approved, prepare for the commercialization of CPI-818, ciforadenant, and mupadolimab, as well as product candidates under our other development programs. These expenditures will include costs associated with research and development, conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, manufacturing and supply, sales and marketing and general operations. In addition, other unanticipated costs may arise. Because the outcome of any clinical trial and/or regulatory approval process is highly uncertain, we may not be able to accurately estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development, regulatory approval process and commercialization of CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab or any other product candidates.

As of December 31, 2022, we had capital resources consisting of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $42.3 million. We do not expect our existing capital resources to be sufficient to enable us to fund the completion of all of our ongoing and planned clinical trials and remaining development program of any of CPI-818, ciforadenant or mupadolimab through commercialization. In addition, while Angel Pharmaceuticals has received outside investment of approximately $41.0 million in connection with its formation and licensing of certain of our intellectual property, such cash is not available for our use. Our operating plan may change as a result of many factors, including those described below as well as others currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through public or private equity, including pursuant to the 2020 Sales Agreement and 2021 Sales Agreement (each defined below) with Jefferies LLC (“Jefferies”), debt financings or other sources, such as strategic collaborations. Such financing would result in dilution to stockholders, imposition of debt covenants and repayment obligations or other restrictions that may affect our business. If we raise additional capital through strategic collaboration agreements, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates, including possible future revenue streams. For example, in October 2020 we formed Angel Pharmaceuticals with a group of investors in China to create a new China-based biopharmaceutical company with a mission to bring innovative quality medicines to Chinese patients for treatment of serious diseases including cancer, autoimmune diseases and infectious diseases. We granted Angel Pharmaceuticals a license to rights to develop and commercialize our three clinical-stage candidates – CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab – in greater China and Angel obtained global rights to our BTK inhibitor preclinical programs. In addition, additional funding may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all, and any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. Furthermore, even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations.

The amount and timing of any expenditures needed to implement our development and commercialization programs will depend on numerous factors, including, but not limited to:

Table of Contents

● the costs and timing of establishing sales and marketing capabilities;

● general economic conditions, such as rising inflation;

● the effect of competing technological and market developments;

● our ability to attract, hire and retain qualified personnel;

● the costs associated with being a public company.

Several of these factors are outside of our control and if we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we will be unable to complete the clinical trials for CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab and our other product candidates, and we may be required to significantly curtail some or all of our activities.

Risks Related to the Discovery and Development of Our Product Candidates

Our product candidates are in various stages of development and may fail or suffer delays that materially and adversely affect their commercial viability. If we are unable to advance our product candidates through clinical development, obtain regulatory approval and ultimately commercialize such product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources in the development of our most advanced product candidates, CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab. We have no products on the market and our ability to achieve and sustain profitability depends on obtaining regulatory approvals for and successfully commercializing our product candidates, either alone or with third parties. Before obtaining regulatory approval for the commercial distribution of our product candidates, we or our collaborator must conduct extensive preclinical tests and clinical trials to demonstrate sufficient safety and efficacy of our product candidates in patients.

As a result, we may not have the financial resources to continue development of, or to modify existing or enter into new collaborations for, a product candidate if we experience any issues that delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or our ability to commercialize, product candidates, including:

Table of Contents

● the extent to which the COVID-19 pandemic may impact our clinical trials;

● delays in enrolling research subjects in clinical trials;

● high drop-out rates of research subjects;

● greater than anticipated clinical trial costs;

We could find that the product candidates we or our collaborators pursue are not safe or effective. Furthermore, if one or more of our product candidates generally prove to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, the development of our entire platform and pipeline could be delayed, potentially permanently. Any of these occurrences may materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Of the large number of drugs in development in the pharmaceutical industry, only a small percentage result in the submission of a NDA or BLA to the FDA or comparable marketing applications to foreign regulatory authorities, and even fewer are approved for commercialization. Furthermore, even if we do receive regulatory approval to market CPI-818, ciforadenant or mupadolimab, any such approval may be subject to limitations on the indicated uses for which we may market the product. Accordingly, even if we are able to obtain the requisite financing to continue to fund our development programs, we cannot assure our stockholders that CPI-818, ciforadenant or mupadolimab will be successfully developed or commercialized. If we or any of our existing or potential future collaborators are unable to develop, or obtain regulatory approval for, or, if approved, successfully commercialize CPI-818, ciforadenant or mupadolimab, we may not be able to generate sufficient revenue to continue our business.

Table of Contents

Clinical drug development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and the results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials are not necessarily predictive of future results. Any product candidate we or any of our existing or potential future collaborators advance into clinical trials, including CPI-818, ciforadenant and mupadolimab, may not have favorable results in later clinical trials, if any, or receive regulatory approval.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials.

Under our collaboration with Angel Pharmaceuticals, Angel will be responsible for the clinical development and commercialization, including all related expenses, of the licensed pipeline programs in greater China, and for the pre-clinical BTK program globally. Angel is enrolling patients in China for our Phase 1/1b clinical trial with CPI-818 and is enrolling patients in a Phase 1/1b clinical trial with mupadolimab alone and together with pembrolizumab in patients with refractory non-small cell lung cancer and head and neck squamous cell cancers. Such trials will be subject to many of the same risks as our ongoing clinical programs.

We cannot be certain that our ongoing or planned clinical trials or any other future clinical trials will be successful. Any safety concerns observed in any one of our clinical trials in our targeted indications could limit the prospects for regulatory approval of our product candidates in those and other indications, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In addition, the FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the European Union (“EU”) recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (“CTR”) which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. While the Clinical Trials Directive required a separate clinical trial application (“CTA”) to be submitted in each member state in which the clinical trial takes place, to both the competent national health authority and an independent ethics committee, the CTR introduces a centralized process and only requires the submission of a single application for multi-center trials. The CTR allows sponsors to make a single submission to both the competent authority and an ethics committee in each member state, leading to a single decision per member state. The assessment procedure of the CTA has been harmonized as well, including a joint assessment by all member states concerned, and a separate assessment by each member state with respect to specific requirements related to its own territory, including ethics rules. Each member state’s decision is communicated to the sponsor via the centralized EU portal. Once the CTA is approved, clinical study development may proceed. The CTR foresees a three-year transition period. The extent to which ongoing and new clinical trials will be governed by the CTR varies. Clinical trials for which an application was submitted (i) prior to January 31, 2022 under the Clinical Trials Directive, or (ii) between January 31, 2022 and January 31, 2023 and for which the sponsor has opted for the application of the Clinical Trials Directive remain governed by said Directive until January 31, 2025. After this date, all clinical trials (including those which are ongoing) will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us, our collaborators and third-party service providers, such as contract research organizations (“CROs”), may impact our developments plans.

If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may also be impacted.

Any termination or suspension of, or delays in the commencement or completion of, our planned clinical trials could result in increased costs to us, delay or limit our ability to generate revenue and adversely affect our commercial prospects.

Before we can initiate clinical trials in the United States or in foreign countries for any of our product and development candidates, we must submit the results of preclinical testing to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities

Table of Contents

CRVS US Equity

CRVS · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

Item 1. Business

Item 1A.

CRVS US Equity☆

CRVS · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

Item 1. Business

Item 1A.

CRVS US Equity