Table of Contents

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, DC 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

For the transition period from to

Commission file number 001-40237

GAIN THERAPEUTICS, INC.

(Exact name of registrant as specified in its charter)

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (301) 500-1556

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

Title of Each Class Trading Symbol Name of Each Exchange on Which Registered

Common Stock, par value $0.0001 per share GANX 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 registrant (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 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:

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 Act). Yes ☐ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant on June 30, 2022 (the last business day of the Registrant’s second fiscal quarter), based upon the closing price of $3.60 of the Registrant’s common stock as reported on The Nasdaq Global Market, was approximately $38.8 million.

As of February 28, 2023, 11,883,368 shares of the registrant's Common Stock were outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the definitive Proxy Statement (“Proxy Statement”) of Gain Therapeutics, Inc. to be filed pursuant to Regulation 14A of the general rules and regulations under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, for the 2023 annual meeting of stockholders to be held within 120 days after the end of the Registrant’s 2022 fiscal year are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Form 10-K.

Table of Contents

GAIN THERAPEUTICS, INC.

ANNUAL REPORT FORM 10-K

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

Cautionary Note Regarding Forward Looking Statements 3

Part I

Item 1. Business 5

Item 1A. Risk Factors 34

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 70

Item 2. Properties 70

Item 3. Legal Proceedings 70

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 70

Part II

Item 6. Selected Financial Data 71

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures about Market Risk 81

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 82

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 113

Item 9B. Other information 114

Part III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 115

Item 11. Executive Compensation 115

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services 115

Part IV

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 116

Unless the context suggests otherwise, references in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, or the Annual Report, to “Gain,” the “Company,” “we,” “us,” and “our” refer to Gain Therapeutics, Inc. and, where appropriate, its wholly owned subsidiaries.

SEE-Tx® is our registered trademark. All other brand names and service marks, trademarks and other trade names appearing in this Annual Report are the property of their respective owners.

Table of Contents

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K contains forward-looking statements which are made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended (the “Securities Act”), and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (the “Exchange Act”). These forward-looking statements can be identified by the fact that they do not relate strictly to historical or current facts and are often characterized by the use of words such as “aim”, “believe,” “can,” “could,” “potential,” “plan,” “predict,” “goals,” “seek,” “should,” “may,” “may have,” “would,” “estimate,” “continue,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “expect” or the negative of these terms, other comparable terminology or by discussions of strategy, plans or intentions. These include, but are not limited to, statements about:

● the potential benefits of our product candidates;

● our ability to obtain, maintain and protect our intellectual property;

● our ability to identify, recruit and retain key personnel;

● our financial performance;

● developments or projections relating to our competitors or our industry;

● the impact of laws and regulations;

Table of Contents

● other factors and assumptions described in this Annual Report.

You should read this Annual Report with the understanding that such forward-looking statements involve known and unknown risks, expectations, uncertainties, assumptions, estimates and projections about our company and other important factors that could cause our actual results, performance or achievements, actual industry results, or other actual results or events to differ materially from historical results, from any plans, intentions, or expectations disclosed in such forward-looking statements or from any future results, performance, achievements or other events expressed, suggested or implied by such forward-looking statements. Therefore, you should not rely on any forward-looking information or statements as predictors of future results or events. Factors that could cause or contribute to such differences in results and events include, without limitation, those specifically addressed under the headings “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Conditions and Results of Operations” in this Annual Report and in our subsequent filings with the Securities and Exchange Commission. The effect of these factors is difficult to predict. In addition, factors other than these could also adversely affect our results, and the reader should not consider these factors to be a complete set of all potential risks or uncertainties. New factors emerge from time to time, and management cannot assess the impact of any such factor on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause results or events to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statement.

Any forward-looking statements included herein speak only as of the date of this Annual Report, and we undertake no obligation to update any forward-looking information or statements for any reason after the date of this Annual Report to conform these statements to actual results or changes in expectations, except as required by law. All forward-looking statements attributable to us are expressly qualified by the foregoing cautionary statements.

Table of Contents

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

We are a biotechnology company developing novel small molecule therapeutics to treat diseases across several therapeutic areas, including, central nervous system (“CNS”) disorders, lysosomal storage disorders (“LSDs”), metabolic disorders, and other diseases that can be targeted through protein degradation, such as oncology. We use our exclusively in-licensed computational target and drug discovery platform, Site-Directed Enzyme Enhancement Therapy (“SEE-Tx®”), to discover novel allosteric binding sites on proteins implicated in a disease and to identify proprietary small molecules that bind these sites to modulate protein function and treat the underlying cause of the disease. We believe that SEE-Tx® is uniquely suited to identify allosteric binding sites on the protein surface, which are different from the protein’s active (or orthosteric) binding site where the natural ligand of the protein binds. Targeting an allosteric binding site instead of the active binding site of a protein provides numerous advantages, including: the ability to regulate proteins implicated in disease through several different mechanisms of action covering both functional and conformational effects, including stabilization, destabilization, targeted degradation, allosteric inhibition, and allosteric activation of the targeted protein; improved specificity of small molecules because binding to an allosteric binding site is non-competitive with the natural substrate that binds to the active binding site; and the ability to identify small molecules with more favorable drug-like properties. The SEE-Tx® platform has been used to identify novel allosteric sites and small molecules for all of our internal programs and partnered programs. Discovering and targeting novel allosteric sites with our platform not only reduces traditional drug discovery timelines but enables rational drug design and offers the potential for superior small molecule drugs that are highly specific and that can penetrate hard to reach tissues and cross the blood-brain barrier.

Our Lead Product Candidate: GT-02287 for the Treatment of GBA1 Parkinson’s disease

Our lead product candidate, GT-02287, is being developed for the treatment of GBA1 Parkinson’s disease, including restoration of GCase function, reduction of toxic lipid substrates and toxic forms of alpha-synuclein, improved survival of dopaminergic neurons, and increase of dopamine levels and improved locomotor function in animal models. We have generated an extensive preclinical data package providing evidence of the mechanism of action of GT-02287, and we anticipate completing IND-enabling toxicology studies by the first half of 2023. We plan to commence a first- in-human, Phase 1 dose escalation clinical trial in Australia of GT-02287 by the second half of 2023. The primary objectives of the Phase 1 clinical trial in Australia will be to evaluate administration of both single and multiple ascending dose levels of GT-02287 in healthy volunteers to assess safety and pharmacokinetics.

Our Research Programs Using SEE-Tx® Platform

In addition, we plan to continue to advance research programs and initiate additional programs targeting allosteric binding sites identified with the SEE-Tx® platform in various therapeutic areas, mainly oncology. Through academic partnerships, co-development and licensing arrangements, we intend to develop a broad pipeline of therapeutics, using our novel approach of identifying and targeting previously unknown allosteric sites.

Table of Contents

Our Platform for Computational Target and Drug Discovery

Overview

A majority of disease-causing proteins (up to 90%) cannot be targeted due to the lack of a known binding site. Our exclusively in-licensed SEE-Tx® platform was designed to address this problem. We use the platform to discover novel binding sites on proteins implicated in a disease and to identify proprietary small molecules that bind these sites to modulate protein function and treat the underlying cause of the disease. We focus specifically on allosteric binding sites distinct from the protein’s active, or orthosteric, binding site, where a small molecule can attach and trigger an effect that may lead to a therapeutic benefit. We refer to the small molecules we identify that bind to these allosteric sites as structurally targeted allosteric regulators, or STARs, to reflect their mechanism of action and how they are discovered. The graphic below provided an overview of SEE-Tx®.

Allosteric Binding Site Identification

Using the three-dimensional structure of proteins that have been experimentally derived or generated or predictive protein structures from AI-powered databases such as Alphafold, our SEE-Tx® platform applies various computational methods and proprietary algorithms to identify and map previously uncharacterized clusters of binding hotspots on the protein surface where a small molecule can potentially bind. The number, density, nature and quality of these hotspot clusters determine the druggability of the protein, which refers to whether drug-like small molecules can effectively bind to the particular site on the target protein with an appropriate potency.

Advantages of Targeting Allosteric Binding Sites

We focus on allosteric binding site, which offer a number of advantages compared to targeting the active binding site of a protein, including the ability to regulate proteins implicated in disease through several different mechanisms of action covering both functional and conformational effects, improved specificity of small molecules because binding to an allosteric binding site is non-competitive with the natural ligand that binds to the active binding site, and the ability to identify small molecules with more favorable drug-like properties. The graphic below provided an overview of the differences and benefits of allosteric binding sites compared to active binding sites.

Table of Contents

Identification of Structurally Targeted Allosteric Regulators (“STARs”) – Our Molecular Hypothesis

After an allosteric site has been identified, characterized and selected for targeting, we then use our proprietary structure-based virtual screening methodology to filter a pool of seven to ten million commercially-available compounds to identify those that may potentially bind to the hotspot and have a functional effect. Using this information, we develop structural templates to guide the development of a narrowed pool of unique and proprietary small molecules that bind to the newly discovered allosteric sites.

We believe our process for identifying STARs provides several advantages over traditional drug discovery approaches such as random high-throughput screening. In high-throughput screening, very large libraries of randomly selected molecules are tested for their ability to perform a specific function such as binding to a target protein. This approach typically results in a large number of positive hits that must then be laboriously analyzed to identify compounds with relevant properties and effect. A high-throughput screening campaign may take up to two years or more to complete, and, on average, only 0.1% of all compounds tested in this manner bind to the targeted protein with the desired effect. In contrast, our approach is significantly less expensive, significantly faster and significantly more effective. We run our SEE-Tx® simulations for target and drug discovery in supercomputer centers where we pay only for time used as and when needed. We can identify a novel allosteric site in one to two weeks, perform virtual screening in three to four weeks, and validate compounds experimentally in two to three weeks. Our average hit rate for validated compounds is 14%, a greater than 100-fold higher success rate compared to traditional high throughput screening methods. Further, every small molecule hit identified by our platform is experimentally tested based on a two-part molecular hypothesis to confirm that (1) the compound has a positive effect on the relevant biomarkers implicated in the disease and (2) binding to the allosteric binding site identified with the SEE-Tx® platform has the intended effect on protein function.

Allosteric Regulators Cover Several Mechanisms of Action

Another benefit of targeting allosteric sites is that it allows for several different mechanisms of action. In our LSD and Parkinson’s disease programs, we have identified STARs that are designed to bind to a protein with a tendency to misfold, stabilize that protein in its correctly folded state and restore protein function. However, in areas such as oncology, we have identified STARs that are designed to destabilize target proteins by binding to a non-native or mutant form of the protein and render it inactive. There are several additional potential mechanisms of action including allosteric targeted protein degradation, as well as traditional allosteric inhibition or activation by inducing a conformational change to inhibit or induce binding by the natural ligand of the active site of the protein. The graphic below provides an overview of the different mechanism of action available through allosteric binding sites.

Enzyme Misfolding and Disease

Proteins are large biomolecules that have a vast array of functions in different cell types in the body. Enzymes are a type of protein that accelerate and facilitate chemical reactions inside of cells by acting on substrates and converting those substrates into different chemical products. To perform their function in the body, enzymes and other proteins must be folded into the correct three-dimensional shape. Misfolded enzymes may not function properly, which can lead to the toxic accumulation of unprocessed substrate which is the cause of many rare genetic diseases, including LSDs and some neurodegenerative diseases such as certain forms of Parkinson’s disease. Enzyme misfolding may arise from genetic mutations that disrupt the folding pattern as well as from cellular stress due to aging and inflammation. Therapeutic small molecules that facilitate the folding of enzymes into their correct shape can restore function and the proper processing of substrate. As illustrated below, in LSDs, the gene that codes for an enzyme is

Table of Contents

mutated and results in a misfolded enzyme. The misfolded enzyme cannot traffic through the cell resulting in toxic substrate accumulation in the lysosome. We believe that our STARs will have the ability to bind to the allosteric site of the defective enzyme and restore wild type activity and thus serve as potential therapeutic treatments for diseases. The graphic below provided an overview of the postulated mechanism of action.

Limitations of Current Therapies for the Treatment of LSDs

Current therapeutic approaches to address misfolded enzymes have inherent limitations. In standard chaperone therapy, the drug binds to the active site of the enzyme or other target protein which impairs the protein’s function to some degree by competing with the active substrate, decreasing efficacy and potentially leading to selectivity issues. Other treatments such as enzyme replacement therapy, or ERT, in which new functional enzymes are infused into the patient, are not suitable for treating neurological conditions because currently available ERTs cannot cross the blood-brain barrier. Gene therapy, which aims to replace mutated genes with non-mutated genes that then can expressfunctional enzymes, is not readily accepted for treating neurological conditions because the procedure is invasive in nature and the efficacy of treating neurological conditions remains to be established. In addition, clinical development, manufacturing and commercialization of gene therapies remains challenging in light of safety risks, complex manufacturing processes and high production costs, and difficulties in establishing prices acceptable to payors and health care systems. Given these limitations on current therapies and novel therapeutics approaches, we believe patients would benefit from mall molecules acting as structurally targeted allosteric regulators that offer a new therapeutic approach both on their own and, potentially, in combination with existing therapies. We believe our therapeutic approach represents a potentially significant change from current approaches by addressing protein misfolding using our efficient and proprietary ability to identify previously undiscovered allosteric sites and compounds that avoid the active sites of enzymes and cross the blood-brain barrier or penetrate other hard-to-treat tissues such as bone and cartilage.

Table of Contents

Our Pipeline of STARs

We are leveraging our SEE-Tx® technology platform to develop a pipeline of novel small molecule drug candidates to address complex diseases. The platform is disease agnostic and provides us with the ability to expand our pipeline, quickly, efficiently and at low cost. We are currently focusing on progressing our programs in Parkinson’s and Gaucher disease. We are also continuing to develop our program in Krabbe disease and liver and lung disease, and applying our SEE-Tx® platform to establish new programs in oncology. We are seeking non-dilutive funding in order to progress our other research programs in additional lysosomal storage disorders and metabolic diseases.

Our Product Pipeline

GCase Enzyme-Related Disorders: GBA1 Parkinson’s Disease and Neuronopathic Gaucher Disease

We are investigating the restoration of GCase enzymatic function as a treatment for Parkinson’s Disease, or PD, and neuronopathic Gaucher disease, or nGD, an LSD. GCase is an enzyme encoded by the GBA1 gene and found in lysosomes that is needed to breakdown the large molecule glucocerebroside (a component of the cell membrane) into sugar and fat.

Homozygous mutations of the GBA1 gene lead to the misfolding of GCase and associated GCase dysfunction and degradation, which in turn can lead to accumulation of GCase substrates to toxic levels in the liver, spleen, bone marrow and brain and can result in lysosomal storage and neurodegenerative diseases. Unlike other types of Gaucher disease, none of the existing therapeutics are effective in treating nGD.

GBA1 gene mutations are also found in the most pathogenic form of Parkinson’s disease, or PD, where heterozygous mutations of the GBA1 gene also lead to the misfolding of GCase and reduced GCase activity, which similarly leads to accumulation of toxic levels of lipid substrate as well as alpha-synuclein, a pathological hallmark of Parkinson’s disease. Decreased GCase activity is also observed in idiopathic PD (PD that occurs in patients without GBA1 mutations) and Dementia with Lewy Bodies. Currently, there is no cure for nGD or PD, and there are no treatment options that can halt or delay neuronal cell death, the underlying cause of the disease. Current treatments such as ERT cannot address central nervous system symptoms because they cannot cross the blood-brain barrier.

Overview of GBA1 Parkinson’s Disease

Parkinson’s disease is a disorder of the central nervous system that affects movement, often including tremors. Damage to dopaminergic neurons in the brain causes dopamine levels to drop, leading to the symptoms of Parkinson's disease. Parkinson's disease often starts with a tremor in one hand and other symptoms including slow movement, stiffness and loss of balance, and progresses to a severely debilitating disease that eventually requires full-time home care or a transfer to a skilled nursing facility.

GBA1 Parkinson’s disease is caused by mutations in the GBA1 gene, which are the major genetic risk factor for the development of Parkinson’s disease and related neurodegenerative disorders characterized by the accumulation of alpha-synuclein in cell bodies of neurons. It is widely accepted that GCase deficiency has a biological role as a modifier or facilitator of Parkinson’s disease pathogenesis in the brain. Brain autopsy studies have shown that decreased levels of GCase are also found in patients with idiopathic Parkinson’s disease (without GBA1 mutations). Reduced GCase

Table of Contents

activity may enhance the risk for Parkinson’s disease by facilitating a pathological hallmark, namely alpha-synuclein accumulation. Alpha-synuclein accumulation and GCase deficiency are thought to act in a debilitating cycle. GCase deficiency can cause the accumulation of glucosylsphingosine substrate, which has been reported to directly affect the accumulation and aggregation of alpha-synuclein. In addition, increased alpha-synuclein levels can lead to less GCase activity, which in turn can lead to more alpha-synuclein accumulation.

Parkinson’s disease is reported to affect about 1 in 780 people worldwide or approximately one million worldwide. Up to 15% of patients with Parkinson’s disease carry GBA1 mutations, making it the major genetic risk factor for the disease and this rate is higher in certain patient populations. At present, there is no effective cure for Parkinson’s disease. Current approved therapies for Parkinson’s disease are limited to symptomatic treatments such as levodopa, dopaminergic receptor agonists and inhibitors of enzymes related to dopamine metabolism such as monoamine oxidase inhibitors and catechol-O-methyltransferase inhibitors. These therapies aim to improve overall dopaminergic function. The benefits of these types of treatments diminish over time as the disease progresses, and these therapies do not impact the non-motor symptoms such as cognitive decline or the progression of the disease. As the disease progresses, the non-motor symptoms, such as dementia and cognitive impairment, can lead to severe morbidity and mortality.

Overview of Gaucher Disease

Gaucher disease is an inherited LSD caused by homozygous mutations of the GBA1 gene that result in the misfolding and subsequent dysfunction of GCase, an enzyme that breaks down fatty chemicals in the body. Gaucher disease is traditionally classified according to one of three types. Type 1 Gaucher disease is traditionally referred to as a non-neuronopathic form of the disease, for which some treatments are available, but evolving science has shown that patients with type 1 Gaucher disease may also manifest neurological symptoms later in life. Current ERT and gene therapy treatments are unable to address the onset of type 1 neurological symptoms because these treatments are unable to cross the blood-brain barrier. Unlike Gaucher disease type 1, Gaucher disease types 2 and 3 have early onset brain degeneration that worsens over time. For this reason, Gaucher disease types 2 and 3 are known as neuronopathic Gaucher disease (nGD). Currently, there is no effective treatment for nGD. In type 2 Gaucher disease, there is neurological impairment that presents before birth through the first months of life, progresses rapidly, and is typically fatal within two years. It is a devastating disorder characterized by neurodegeneration and brainstem dysfunction. Additionally, infants with Gaucher disease may have abnormally large organs, deficiency in growth, seizures and compromised swallow and airway problems. Gaucher disease type 3 (also known as chronic neuronopathic Gaucher disease) has a later and more gradual onset compared with type 2. People with Gaucher disease type 3 may survive into adulthood with a wide variety of signs and symptoms, including seizures, skeletal irregularities, eye movement disorders, cognitive and coordination problems as well as enlarged liver and spleen, respiratory problems and blood disorders.

Gaucher disease is caused by mutations of the GBA1 gene that encodes GCase, an enzyme which catalyzes a key step in breaking down glucosylceramide and glucosylsphingosine. Partial or complete loss of GCase activity can cause the buildup of glucosylceramide and glucosylsphingosine in the lysosomes of macrophages, and the accumulation of these lipid substrates in neuronal cells can result in neurological symptoms.

The prevalence of Gaucher disease type 1 (non-neuronopathic Gaucher disease) is reported as 1:57,000 to 75,000 people worldwide. Type 1 is the most common form in Western countries (around 95%). The prevalence of type 2 and type 3 Gaucher disease, or nGD, is approximately 1:100,000 people worldwide, and these forms are the most common in non-Western countries, especially in Asian countries where they make up more than 50% of the Gaucher disease patient population. At present there are no available treatment options for neuronopathic Gaucher disease, but ERT is still used to address organ enlargement, hematological manifestation and bone disease, as well as to improve the quality of life for these patients. ERT does not cross the blood-brain barrier and is not efficient in treating neurological manifestations, therefore creating a significant unmet medical need in this patient population.

Preclinical Characterization of Lead Compound GT-02287 for the Treatment of GBA1-related Diseases

We have continued to assess the performance of our lead compounds GT-02287 and GT-02329 in the various cell-based and animal models of PD and GD that we have performed with these compounds. As more data have been generated, we determined that both molecules have similar properties and are similarly suitable for the development in GBA1 PD and nGD. In light of the totality of the data generated with these compounds to date, we have determined to select GT-02287 as the drug candidate for all GBA1-related disease and to maintain GT-02329 as a potential back-

Table of Contents

up compound to GT-02287. This decision resulted in a reduction of projected development costs of our GBA1 program of approximately $8.4 million.

Activity in Biophysical and Cell-based Assays

Biophysical assay results have demonstrated that GT-02287 binds to the GCase protein and increases its thermal stability. In cell-based functional assays, we observed a dose-dependent increase in GCase activity in normal and GCase mutant cells when treated with GT-02287 as well as a concomitant depletion of the GCase substrate, glucosyl ceremide. Our STAR compound also has shown GCase enzyme enhancement in an extended panel of patient derived cells representative of the most frequent and pathogenic GBA1 mutations related to GBA1 PD and nGD. In addition, we reported that GT-02287 increased GCase enzyme levels, co-localization of GCase with lysosomes, reduced GlcCer accumulation as well as phosphorylated and aggregated a-synuclein accumulation in cells derived from L444P/RecNcil and L444P/L444P patients.

Toxicology and Safety

GLP toxicology studies have shown that GT-02287 is well tolerated following single oral administration of 2000 mg/kg and 1000 mg/kg for male and female rats, respectively, and 1000 mg/kg in male and female dogs.

The GLP toxicology study with repeated administrations of GT-02287 in male and female dogs and rats is currently ongoing. No severe toxicity has been encountered up to 1000 mg/kg in dog after 14 day administration, corresponding to a human equivalent dose of 33 g per day (based on 60 kg as a standard human subject body weight). We anticipate completing IND-enabling toxicology studies in the first half of 2023 with the goal of filing the dossier required to commence a first-in-human, Phase 1 clinical trial of GT-02287 in the second half of 2023.

Pharmacokinetics

Studies in mice, rats and dogs have shown that GT-02287 is quickly absorbed following oral administration, reaching the maximal concentration in plasma (Tmax) between 0.5 and 2 hours with a plasmatic half-life (t1/2) of about 2 hours in mice, 3 hours in rats and 5 hours in dogs.

We examined GT-02287 in neuro-PK studies to evaluate its brain penetration properties, and we observed high brain exposure with a brain-to-plasma ratio level greater than one.

In-Vivo Pharmacology in PD Animal Models

In mice administered the GCase inhibitor CBE (conduritol beta epoxide) plus intra-striatal injected alpha-synuclein pre-formed fibrils, or PFF, to simulate the effects of GBA1 Parkinson’s disease. GT-02287 was orally administered once a day, at doses of 30, 60 and 90 mg/kg. The data generated in this study showed a statistically significant augmentation of GCase activity, reduction of the accumulation of the toxic substrates glucosylsphingosine and glucosylceramide, a reduction of aggregated alpha synuclein, and a reduction of microgliosis, which is an indicator of reduced neuroinflammation. In the same animal model, GT-02287 improved the survival of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra. Notably, these biological effects resulted in a dose-dependent behavioral effect shown by improved neuromotor strength as measured by the “wire-hang” test.

In a rotenone-induced Parkinson’s disease rat model, GT-02287 was administered orally, twice a day for seven days at a dose of 30, 60 and 90 mg/kg bodyweight. In this study, we observed that GT-02287 showed a reduction of total, aggregated and phosphorylated alpha-synuclein as well as a reduction in microgliosis. In addition GT-02287 improved the survival of dopaminergic neurons along with an increased level of dopamine in the striatum. Notably, these biological effects resulted in a dose-dependent behavioral effect shown by an improvement of the motor functionality measured by assessing the rearing behavior.

To verify the potential difference of a twice-a-day and once-a-day dose regimen, the rotenone rat model was repeated administering GT-02287 orally once per day for 10 days at the dose range 60 and 90 mg/kg. The study provided a similar read-out for aggregated alpha-synuclein and survival of dopaminergic neurons in the substantia nigra thus suggesting that once-a-day oral administration can provide a similar efficacy to twice-a-day administration. In addition, GT-02287 was shown to reduce tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alpha), a biomarker for

Table of Contents

neuroinflammation, in the substantia nigra as well as augment GCase activity in the brain as shown by an increase of GCase activity in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF).

Results of the CBE/PFF Mouse Model

GCase Activity (plasma)Glucosylceremide (brain)Glucosylspingosine (brain)Motor (wire hang)

Results of the Rotenone Rat Model

Table of Contents

In Vivo Pharmacology in GD Animal Models

In mice administered the GCase inhibitor CBE to model Gaucher’s disease, our product candidate GT-02329 was orally administered once a day at a doses of 60 and 90 mg/kg. The data generated in this study showed a statistically significant augmentation of GCase activity in plasma and various different brain regions, reduction of the accumulation of the toxic substrates glucosylsphingosine and glucosylceramide and a reduction of Iba-1 levels, a marker of microgliosis, which is an indicator of reduced neuroinflammation. In the same animal model, treatment with GT-02329 caused dose-dependent behavioral effect shown by improved motor strength as measured by the “wire-hang” test.

Results of the CBE Mouse Model

Iba-1 levels in brains of CBE-injected mice treated with GT-02329 Motor Function

Pipeline Programs in Research and Discovery Phases

In addition to our preclinical stage programs for PD and nGD, we are progressing additional programs in the research and discovery phases, including our Krabbe disease program, our liver and lung disease program, and two active programs in oncology. We are also seeking non-dilutive funding in order to continue additional research programs in additional lysosomal storage disorders and metabolic diseases.

GALC Enzyme-Related Disorders: Krabbe Disease

We are investigating the restoration of GALC function as a treatment for Krabbe disease. GALC is an enzyme in lysosomes needed to breakdown galactolipids, which are fats primarily found in the nervous system and kidneys. Among the galactolipids that GALC breaks down are galactosylceramide, which is an essential component of neuronal myelin, and psychosine, which is formed during myelin production and is toxic to cells. The misfolding of GALC can

Table of Contents

result in the toxic accumulation of galactosylceramide, inhibiting myelin production, and of psychosine, leading to demyelination of cells and ultimately to Krabbe disease. There is no available cure for Krabbe disease. Current developments in invasive procedures such as bone marrow transplants have not been shown to provide significant neurological improvements, and most developments in gene therapy treatments are still in the preclinical stages.

We have identified compounds that bind to allosteric sites on GALC and stabilize the enzyme in vitro. We are continuing our development of these promising molecules.

Overview of Krabbe Disease

Krabbe disease is a severe neurological condition that is part of a group of disorders which result from the loss of myelin (demyelination) in the CNS. Myelin is the protective covering around neurons that ensures the rapid transmission of neural signals. The most common form of Krabbe disease, the infantile form, usually begins before the age of one. Initial symptoms typically include irritability, muscle weakness, feeding difficulties, episodes of fever without any sign of infection, stiff posture and delayed mental and physical development. As the disease progresses, muscles continue to weaken, affecting the infant’s ability to move, chew, swallow and breathe. Affected infants also experience vision loss and seizures. Because of the severity of the condition, individuals with the infantile form of Krabbe disease rarely survive beyond the age of two. The less common forms, those that have a later onset, begin in childhood, adolescence, or adulthood. Vision problems and walking difficulties are the most common initial symptoms in these late-onset forms of the disorder, however, signs and symptoms vary considerably among affected individuals. Individuals with late-onset Krabbe disease may survive many years after the condition begins.

Krabbe disease is an inherited LSD caused by mutations in the gene GALC. In affected individuals, GALC substrate psychosine accumulation can trigger a neuroinflammatory response, a loss of myelin forming cells and a progressive demyelination of the central and peripheral nervous systems.

The prevalence of Krabbe disease is reported as about 1 in 100,000 to 1 in 250,000 live births worldwide. At present, there is no effective cure or disease-modifying treatment for Krabbe Disease. Treatment of a child who is symptomatic before six months of age is supportive and focused on improving quality of life and avoiding complications. For older individuals, treatment with HSCT is individualized based on disease burden and manifestations, but it serves to delay disease progression and is not an effective cure.

Preclinical Characterization of GALC Lead Compounds

Biological Activity

We have identified several compounds that bind to allosteric sites on GALC and are able to stabilize GALC against thermal denaturation. STAR molecules were tested in vitro in transfected HEK293 cells bearing different mutations (WT, G286D, T529M). We examined promising STAR molecules in neuro-PK studies to evaluate their brain penetration properties. Several of the compounds selected showed enhanced enzyme enhancement and high brain exposure with a brain-to-plasma ratio level greater than one.

In collaboration with Ernesto R. Bongarzone, Ph.D., Professor in Neuroscience at the College of Medicine at the University of Illinois, Chicago, initial compounds from this program were tested in mouse glial cultures and cell lines with relevant GALC mutations to measure their effect on GALC enzymatic activity and psychosine levels. We showed that the tested compounds showed significant reduction in psychosine levels in glial cultures.

Further characterization of our compounds is ongoing and we expect to select a lead series for further development based on additional data generated in this program.

GLB Enzyme-Related Disorders: GM1 Gangliosidosis

GLB is an enzyme found in lysosomes, which are compartments within cells that degrade and recycle different types of molecules, including toxic molecules. GLB is essential for the breakdown of GM1 and keratan sulfate, which serve important functions in the brain and other tissues. Misfolding of GLB allows these substrates to build up to toxic levels and leads to the diseases GM1 Gangliosidosis.

Table of Contents

GM1 gangliosidosis is a rare and often life-threatening LSD in infants (type 1), juveniles (type 2) and adults (type 3). It manifests in a continuum of clinical severity by type. In type 1 or the infantile form, the onset is observed earlier and is a more severe and rapidly progressive disease. Type 2 and 3 are less severe manifestations and have slower progression with a juvenile or adult onset. The infantile form of the disease is characterized by onset in the first year of life with symptoms including hypotonia (reduced muscle tone), progressive CNS dysfunction that can lead to deafness, blindness, enlarged liver and spleen rigidity, and progressive skeletal dysplasia that can result in restrictive lung disease and aspiration pneumonia. The disease rapidly progresses, with a life expectancy of two to four years. Juvenile GM1 manifests between 18 months and five years of age with a slower progression compared to infants. The average life expectancy for type 2 GM1 is typically 10 years. Adult GM1 has an onset age between three and 30. While it is less severe and progresses at a slower rate than infantile or juvenile GM1, adult GM1 causes debilitating symptoms, including muscular atrophy, corneal clouding and dystonia.

The prevalence of GM1 is approximately 1:100,000 to 200,000 live births worldwide. Currently, there is no effective cure for GM1, and symptomatic treatment options, including substrate reduction therapy, ERT, bone marrow transplantation, stem cell transplantation and gene therapy are limited or still under development. We believe current approaches are unable to address both the neuronal and systemic symptoms because current treatment options cannot cross the blood-brain barrier or reach other hard-to-treat organs, such as bone.

In Vitro Characterization of STARs for the Treatment of GM1 Gangliosidosis

We have identified novel STAR molecules targeting GLB through our SEE-Tx® platform and conducted our initial studies on these compounds. Binding of two of these compounds to the GLB target has been confirmed using a biophysical assay. Preclinical studies indicate that our STARs help mutated GLB escape premature degradation and travel to the lysosome where it can perform its catalytic activity. These preliminary studies were conducted in vitro using cells that carried the GLB1 mutation. In addition, one compound showed clearance of the toxic GM1 ganglioside accumulation in GM1-affected canine cells. Based on the data generated to date, we have selected a lead series for further characterization and development.

Serpina related disorder: alpha-1 Antitrypsin (A1AT) Deficiency

We are investigating the stabilization of alpha-1 antitrypsin (A1AT) as a potential treatment for rare lung and/or liver disorder. If A1AT is stabilized, then we believe the molecule would be rendered inactive, thereby preventing the gain of function of the molecule in the lung or liver. We have identified one allosteric site and have selected 146 virtual hits obtained from virtual screening with which we plan to start experimental hit confirmation.

Primary Screening

Hit identification completed with Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR) at one concentration and in dose-response. Binding was confirmed for 23 of 146 compounds (15.6% hit rate). Hit analoging was completed with 85 analog compounds tested in a SPR dose-response assay. Positive signal was observed for 4 of 85 compounds.

We have now identified a hit chemical series that inhibits polymerization of A1AT protein, and a priority patent application was filed in February 2023.

On March 21, 2023 we announced that that Eurostars with Innosuisse have awarded a grant in the aggregate amount of €1.2 million to a consortium led by Gain Therapeutics which includes the Institute for Research in Biomedicine, Newcells Biotech and the University of Helsinki. This grant supports a research project to develop novel small molecule allosteric regulators against Alpha-1 Antitrypsin (AAT) Deficiency, a rare genetic condition that can result in serious lung and liver diseases.

Oncology

Allosteric Regulators in Oncology

Allosteric regulators are molecules able to modify the activity of a protein binding to a site topographically distinct from the site of the protein, called the active site, in which the activity characterizing the protein is carried out and in oncology usually involves the binding of receptors.

Table of Contents

Targeting allosteric sites may provide greater specificity and selectivity of activity and allow for a better efficacy and safety profile. An allosteric site is more specific to an individual protein, potentially leading to safer and more efficacious medicines. The allosteric-targeted therapies also introduce the possibility of fine-tuning a protein’s activity in new ways—one modulator may shift a protein into a conformation that shuts it down entirely, while another might under the right condition potentiate activity, and others may result in activity levels in between. Allosteric drugs open the door to identifying drug targets that are inaccessible to traditional active-site inhibitors. Allosteric drugs also may provide a new foundation for combining oncolytic agents, to achieve important additive and synergistic effects, and to prevent or overcome drug-resistance to traditional orthosteric anti-cancer agent.

Target Selection Strategy

Targets have been selected based on the potential mechanism of action (with an initial focus on allosteric inhibition), unmet medical needs such as immune resistance, metastatic resistance, non satisfactory response to current standard of care, level of innovation and availability of preclinical tools.

Our Oncology Programs

We have two active oncology projects underway in which we are identifying STARs that are designed to destabilize target proteins by binding to allosteric sites on the proteins and rendering them inactive. Thus far we have identified allosteric binding sites and run virtual screens to identify virtual hits which are being characterized further in biochemical and cell-based assays.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by the rapid evolution of technologies and understanding of disease etiology, intense competition, and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We believe that our SEE-Tx® platform, our scientific capabilities, know-how and experience provide us with competitive advantages. However, we expect substantial competition from multiple sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical, and existing or emerging biotechnology companies, academic research institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions worldwide. Many of our competitors, either alone or with their collaborations, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient enrollment in clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. As a result, our competitors may discover, develop, license, or commercialize products before or more successfully than we do. We are not aware of any other companies that are taking the same therapeutic approach to protein folding disorders similar to the ones we are pursuing. However, we are aware of companies developing products for the same target indications. For example, companies targeting GBA-PD using small molecules include Vanqua Bio and Caraway Therapeutics. While both of these approaches are small molecules hypothesized to increase GCase levels, they differ from our approach because our molecules act as non-competitive pharmacological chaperones, specifically focused on stabilizing and restoring function to misfolded GCase. There are also a number of companies targeting GBA-PD through other modalities such as cell/gene therapies and monoclonal antibodies. These companies include, among others: Prevail Therapeutics, which is evaluating a potential gene therapy candidate in a Phase 1/2 clinical trial, Apollo Therapeutics and Voyager Therapeutics.

There are also a number of companies with alpha-synuclein specific approaches ranging from all stages of clinical development but these are distinct from us as they only aim to deplete a specific substrate rather than affecting the root cause of the disease at the start of the disease cascade. For Krabbe disease, companies such as Chiesi, Ranedis, Passage Bio, MediciNova and Polaryx are all developing potential therapies, which we believe are in the preclinical stage. We may also face competition from large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions, government agencies and public and private research institutions with genetic medicine and other therapeutic approaches.

Additionally, new or advanced technologies developed by our competitors may render our current or future product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing our product candidates against competitors.

Table of Contents

Strategic Transactions; Collaboration and Licensing Arrangements

In connection with our business development activities, we enter into collaborative and licensing arrangement with third parties, to use our licensed SEE-Tx® computational platform technology to discover novel allosteric sites on misfolded proteins and identify proprietary small molecules that bind these sites, potentially restoring protein folding and treating disease. We expect to continue to identify and evaluate collaboration, co-development and licensing opportunities that may be similar to or different from the collaborations and licenses that we have entered into.

Zentalis Pharmaceuticals, Inc.

On April 20, 2021, we entered into a multi-target collaboration agreement, or the Zentalis Agreement, with Zentalis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., or Zentalis, to discover new product candidates for the treatment of cancer. Under the terms of the agreement, we used our licensed SEE-Tx computational platform technology to identify binding site on target proteins and determine the potential suitability of these sites as drug targets, as well as the prospective therapeutic use of our technology for treatment of oncology.

During the course of 2022, Zentalis informed us of its desire to wind down the collaboration. Based on the results generated during the collaboration, we determined to continue the research activities independently (without support of Zentalis) with respect to the applicable target as one of our own internal programs.

Minoryx Therapeutics, S.L.

We have entered into a license agreement, dated December 20, 2017 (the “Minoryx License Agreement”), with Minoryx Therapeutics, S.L., a company organized under the laws of Spain (“Minoryx”), pursuant to which we obtained exclusive worldwide license rights from Minoryx to use and exploit its intellectual property (“IP”), including its SEE-Tx® discovery platform for the identification of non-competitive pharmacological chaperones and exclusive worldwide sublicense rights to certain IP licensed by Minoryx from the University of Barcelona and the Institució Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avançats. Under the terms of the Minoryx License Agreement, we have an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing, assignable, transferable license, including the right to license through multiple tiers of sublicense, to Minoryx’s IP to make, have made, use, import, export, offer to sell, have sold, copy, modify, perform, display, create derivative versions of products in the licensed field or otherwise to exploit Minoryx’s IP in the field. Minoryx’s IP includes the SEE-Tx® discovery platform, certain proprietary Minoryx compounds acting as pharmacological chaperones, all patents and pending applications related thereto and Minoryx’s Know-How and Trademark related to the SEE-Tx® platform. We also have an exclusive, worldwide, royalty-bearing, assignable, transferable sublicense, including the right to sublicense through multiple tiers of sublicense, to the IP of Universitat de Barcelona (UB) and Institucio Catalana de Recerca i Estudis Avancats (ICREA) in EP11380102 and know-how and software related thereto, for the purpose of making, having made, using, importing, offering to sell, selling and having sold, copying, modifying, performing, displaying, and creating derivative versions of products in the field. Under the Minoryx License Agreement, products include any product in the field that would infringe the UB/ICREA IP or the Minoryx IP in the absence of the license provided therein. Also, the field encompasses any field of use and commercialization of the UB/ICREA IP or the Minoryx IP. Unless earlier terminated, the Minoryx License Agreement expires upon expiration of the royalty term, which occurs ten years after the first product covered by the licensed IP is commercialized. Khalid Islam, the Chairman of our board of directors and one of our founders, is currently the Chairman of the board of directors of Minoryx.

As consideration for the license grant from Minoryx, we have agreed to pay Minoryx royalties on a product-by-product basis based on the licensed IP used by us, ranging from a high single digit to low single digit percentage of net revenues of products during the royalty term commencing on the effective date of the Minoryx License Agreement and continuing until the 10th anniversary of the first product commercialization. Upon the expiration of the royalty term for a product or service in a country, the license with respect to the product or service, as the case may be, shall become royalty-free, fully-paid, irrevocable and perpetual.

The Minoryx License Agreement will terminate upon expiration of the royalty term (which is the 10th anniversary of the commercialization of the first product covered by the licensed IP) or by mutual agreement. In addition, each party has the right to terminate the Minoryx License Agreement upon a material breach by the other party that remains uncured. Minoryx has the right to terminate the Minoryx License Agreement on a country-by-country basis if we abandon the technology or use the technology for purposes in violation of law and we fail to cure

Table of Contents

such abandonment or unlawful use. We may terminate the Minoryx License Agreement at any time upon 90 days’ written notice.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technologies, inventions and improvements that we believe are important to our business, including seeking, maintaining and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, pursuing and obtaining patent protection in the United States and in jurisdictions outside of the United States related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements, platforms and our product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business.

As of February 2023, our patent portfolio consisted of six pending European patent applications and related national stage applications. In regard to our SEE-Tx® Technology, we in-license a European patent under the Minoryx License Agreement, which is owned by UB/ICREA and has claims directed to a method of binding site and binding energy determination by mixed explicit solvent simulations. This patent is expected to expire in 2032.

In regard to our GLB program, we in-license from Minoryx pursuant to the Minoryx License Agreement, a patent family with a pending European patent application with claims directed to composition of matter and eight foreign patent applications pending in such jurisdictions such as Canada, Australia, Japan, Europe, and China. These patents applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2037, not giving effect to any potential patent term extensions and patent term adjustments and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees.

In regard to our GBA program, we in-licensed from Minoryx pursuant to the Minoryx License Agreement, a patent family with a pending European patent application with claims directed to composition of matter and eight foreign patent applications pending in such jurisdictions such as Canada, Australia, Japan, Europe, and China. These patent applications, if issued, are expected to expire in 2037, not giving effect to any potential patent term extensions and patent term adjustments and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance, renewal, annuity or other governmental fees.

Individual patents extend for varying periods depending on the date of filing of the patent application or the date of patent issuance and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. Generally, patents issued for regularly filed applications in the United States are granted a term of 20 years from the earliest effective non-provisional filing date or the filing date of a PCT application that designates the United States. In addition, in certain instances, a patent term can be extended to recapture a portion of the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, delay in issuing the patent as well as a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period. However, as to the FDA component, 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 duration of foreign patents varies in accordance with provisions of applicable local law, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date, which is typically the filing date of the PCT application. 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.

Furthermore, we rely upon trade secrets and know-how and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect our proprietary information, in part, using confidentiality agreements with our collaborators, employees and consultants and invention assignment agreements with our employees. We also have confidentiality agreements or invention assignment agreements with our collaborators and selected consultants. These agreements are designed to protect our proprietary information and, in the case of the invention assignment agreements, to grant us ownership of technologies that are developed through a relationship with a third party. These agreements may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our collaborators, employees and consultants use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions.

Our success will also depend in part on not infringing upon the proprietary rights of third parties. It is uncertain whether the issuance of any third-party patent would require us to alter our development or commercial

Table of Contents

strategies, or our drugs or processes, obtain licenses or cease certain activities. Our breach of any license agreements or failure to obtain a license to proprietary rights that we may require to develop or commercialize our future drugs may have an adverse impact on us. If third parties have prepared and filed patent applications prior to March 16, 2013 in the United States that also claim technology to which we have rights, we may have to participate in interference proceedings in the USPTO to determine priority of invention.

Government Regulation

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring and post-approval reporting of drugs. We, along with our vendors, contract research organizations and contract manufacturers, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical, manufacturing and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval of our product candidates. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals of drugs and ensuring subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

In the U.S., the FDA regulates drug products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FD&C Act, as amended, its implementing regulations and other laws. If we fail to comply with applicable FDA or other requirements at any time with respect to product development, clinical testing, approval or any other legal requirements relating to product manufacture, processing, handling, storage, quality control, safety, marketing, advertising, promotion, packaging, labeling, export, import, distribution, or sale, we may become subject to administrative or judicial sanctions or other legal consequences. These sanctions or consequences could include, among other things, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, issuance of clinical holds for ongoing studies, withdrawal of approvals, warning or untitled letters, product withdrawals or recalls, product seizures, relabeling or repackaging, total or partial suspensions of manufacturing or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal prosecution.

The process required by the FDA before our product candidates are approved as drugs for therapeutic indications and may be marketed in the U.S. generally involves the following:

● submission to the FDA of an NDA;

● payment of user fees for FDA review of the NDA; and

Table of Contents

Preclinical Studies and Clinical Trials for Drugs

Before testing any drug in humans, the product candidate must undergo rigorous preclinical testing. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess safety and in some cases to establish the rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal and state regulations and requirements, including GLP requirements for safety/toxicology studies. The results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information and analytical data must be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before clinical trials may begin. Some long-term preclinical testing may continue 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, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the clinical trial, including concerns that human research patients will be exposed to unreasonable health risks, and imposes a clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND may result in the FDA not allowing clinical trials to commence or not allowing clinical trials to commence on the terms originally specified in the IND.

The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control, in accordance with GCP requirements, which include the requirement that all research patients provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters and criteria to be used in monitoring safety and evaluating effectiveness. Each protocol, and any subsequent amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Furthermore, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trial are minimized and are reasonable related to the anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative, and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. The FDA, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend or discontinue a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trials to public registries. Information about clinical trials, including clinical trials results, must be submitted within specific timeframes for publication on the www.clinicaltrials.gov website.

A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the U.S. may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, the sponsor can submit data from the clinical trial to the FDA in support of an NDA. The FDA will accept a well-designed and well-conducted foreign clinical trial not conducted under an IND if the trial was conducted in accordance with GCP requirements, and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary.

Clinical trials to evaluate therapeutic indications to support NDAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap.

●Phase 1—Phase 1 clinical trials involve initial introduction of the investigational product into healthy human volunteers or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are typically designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism and distribution of the investigational product in humans, excretion the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence of effectiveness.

●Phase 2—Phase 2 clinical trials typically involve administration of the investigational product to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks.

●Phase 3—Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve administration of the investigational product to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval and physician labeling.

Table of Contents

Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, 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 and are commonly intended to generate additional safety data regarding use of the product in a clinical setting. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA.

Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators fifteen days after the trial sponsor determines the information qualifies for reporting for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies or animal or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human volunteers and any clinically important increase in the severity or rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the investigator brochure. The sponsor must also notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction as soon as possible but in no case later than seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product candidate and finalize a process for manufacturing the drug 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 manufacturers must develop, among other things, methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug product. Additionally, 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.

U.S. Marketing Approval for Drugs

Assuming successful completion of the required clinical testing, the results of the preclinical studies and clinical trials, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacture, controls and proposed labeling, among other things, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. An NDA must contain proof of the drug’s safety and efficacy. The marketing application may include both negative and ambiguous results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, as well as positive findings. Data may come from company-sponsored clinical trials intended to test the safety and efficacy of a product’s use or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA. FDA approval of an NDA must be obtained before a drug may be marketed in the U.S.

The FDA reviews all submitted NDAs before it accepts them for filing and may request additional information rather than accepting the NDA for filing. The FDA must make a decision on accepting an NDA for filing within 60 days of receipt, and such decision could include a refusal to file by the FDA. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review of the NDA. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the drug is safe and effective and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, quality and purity. Under the goals and polices agreed to by the FDA under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA targets ten months, from the filing date, in which to complete its initial review of a new molecular entity NDA and respond to the applicant, and six months from the filing date of a new molecular entity NDA for priority review. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard or priority NDAs, and the review process is often extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

Further, under PDUFA, as amended, each NDA must be accompanied by a user fee. The FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication.

Table of Contents

The FDA also may require submission of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, program to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh its risks. The REMS program could include medication guides, physician communication plans, assessment plans and/or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries or other risk-minimization tools.

The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, which reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA may inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCP and other requirements and the integrity of the clinical data submitted to the FDA.

After evaluating the NDA and all related information, including the advisory committee recommendation, if any, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA may issue an approval letter, or, in some cases, a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA and may require additional clinical or preclinical testing in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will typically issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications.

Even if the FDA approves a product, depending on the specific risk(s) to be addressed it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, require that post-approval studies, including Phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization or impose other conditions, including distribution and use restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS, which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing studies or surveillance programs. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes and additional labeling claims, are subject to further testing requirements and FDA review and approval.

Orphan Drug Designation and Exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or if it affects more than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product available in the U.S. for the disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. Orphan designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process, though companies developing orphan products are eligible for certain incentives, including tax credits for qualified clinical testing and waiver of application fees.

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 a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity during which the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same therapeutic agent for the same indication, except in limited circumstances, such as a subsequent product’s showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the original applicant cannot produce sufficient quantities of product. Competitors, however, may receive approval of different therapeutic agents for the indication for which the orphan product has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same therapeutic agent for a different indication than that for which the orphan product has exclusivity. Orphan product exclusivity could block the approval of one of our products for seven years if a competitor obtains approval for the same therapeutic agent for the same indication before we do,

Table of Contents

unless we are able to demonstrate that our product is clinically superior. If an orphan designated product receives marketing approval for an indication broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan exclusivity. Further, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the U.S. may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or the manufacturer of the approved product is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Expedited Development and Review Programs for Drugs

The FDA maintains several programs intended to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions. These programs include Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval, and the purpose of these programs is to either expedite the development or review of important new drugs to get them to patients earlier than under standard FDA development and review procedures.

A new drug is eligible for Fast Track designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. Fast Track designation provides increased opportunities for sponsor interactions with the FDA during preclinical and clinical development, in addition to the potential for rolling review once a marketing application is filed, meaning that the agency may review portions of the marketing application before the sponsor submits the complete application, as well as Priority Review, discussed below.

In addition, a new drug may be eligible for Breakthrough Therapy designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Breakthrough Therapy designation provides all the features of Fast Track designation in addition to intensive guidance on an efficient drug development program beginning as early as Phase 1, and FDA organizational commitment to expedited development, including involvement of senior managers and experienced review staff in a cross-disciplinary review, where appropriate.

Any product submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product with Fast Track or Breakthrough Therapy designation, may also be eligible for additional FDA programs intended to expedite the review and approval process, including Priority Review designation and Accelerated Approval. A product is eligible for Priority Review if it has the potential to provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition. Under Priority Review, the FDA must review an application in six months compared to ten months for a standard review.

Additionally, products are eligible for Accelerated Approval if they can be shown to have an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or an effect on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality which 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.

Accelerated Approval is usually contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional post-approval studies to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. The FDA may withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under Accelerated Approval if, for example, the confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product. In addition, unless otherwise informed by the FDA, the FDA currently requires, as a condition for Accelerated Approval, that all advertising and promotional materials that are intended for dissemination or publication within 120 days following marketing approval be submitted to the agency for review during the pre-approval review period, and that after 120 days following marketing approval, all advertising and promotional materials must be submitted at least 30 days prior to the intended time of initial dissemination or publication.

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or the time period for FDA review or approval may not be shortened. Furthermore, Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval do not change the scientific or medical standards for approval or the quality of evidence necessary to support approval but may expedite the development or review process.

Table of Contents

U.S. Post-Approval Requirements for Drugs

Drugs manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, complying with promotion and advertising requirements, which include restrictions on promoting products for unapproved uses or patient populations (known as “off-label use”) and limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. Although physicians may prescribe legally available products for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such uses. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability, including investigation by federal and state authorities. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use or first publication. Further, if there are any modifications to the drug, including changes in indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities, the applicant may be required to submit and obtain FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement, which may require the development of additional data or preclinical studies and clinical trials.

The FDA may impose a number of post-approval requirements as a condition of approval of an NDA. For example, the FDA may require post-market testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization.

In addition, drug manufacturers and their subcontractors involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs 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 ongoing regulatory requirements, including cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and our contract manufacturers. Failure to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements can subject a manufacturer to possible legal or regulatory action, such as warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, product seizures, injunctions, civil penalties or criminal prosecution. There is also a continuing, annual prescription drug product program user fee.

Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information, requirements for post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks, or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

● fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials;

● injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; and

Other Regulatory Matters

Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities of product candidates following product approval, where applicable, or commercialization are also subject to regulation by numerous regulatory authorities in the U.S. in addition to the FDA, which may include the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of

Table of Contents

the Department of Health and Human Services, the Department of Justice, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Consumer Product Safety Commission, the Federal Trade Commission, the Occupational Safety & Health Administration, the Environmental Protection Agency and state and local governments and governmental agencies.

Healthcare Reform

In March 2010, Congress passed the Affordable Care Act, or the ACA, a sweeping law intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of health spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry, and impose additional policy reforms. The ACA, for example, contains provisions that subject products to potential competition by lower-cost products and may reduce the profitability of products through increased rebates for drugs reimbursed by Medicaid programs; address 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, increase the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; establish annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs; and create a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must agree to offer 50% (increased to 70% pursuant to the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018, or BBA, effective as of 2019) point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D.

Since its enactment, there have been judicial, administrative, executive and Congressional legislative challenges to certain aspects of the ACA, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the ACA in the future. For example, on June 17, 2021 the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. In addition, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any additional challenges and healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the ACA and our business.

Other federal health reform measures have been proposed and adopted in the U.S. since the ACA was enacted:

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which have resulted in several recent Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for

Table of Contents

products. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures, and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs, including price-controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs to limit the growth of government paid healthcare costs. For example, the U.S. government has passed legislation requiring pharmaceutical manufacturers to provide rebates and discounts to certain entities and governmental payors to participate in federal healthcare programs. Further, in July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”), released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue as well as potential administrative actions HHS can take to advance these principles. In addition, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs and biologics covered under Medicare, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” for such drugs and biologics under the law, and (ii) imposes rebates with respect to certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B or Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. These provisions will take effect progressively starting in fiscal year 2023, although they may be subject to legal challenges. It is currently unclear how the IRA will be implemented but is likely to have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry. Further, the Biden administration released an additional executive order on October 14, 2022, directing HHS to submit a report on how the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation can be further leveraged to test new models for lowering drug costs for Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries. It is unclear whether this executive order or similar policy initiatives will be implemented in the future. Individual states in the U.S. have also been increasingly passing legislation and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological 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, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

From time to time, legislation is drafted, introduced, and passed in Congress that could significantly change the statutory provisions governing the sale, marketing, coverage, and reimbursement of products regulated by CMS or other government agencies. In addition to new legislation, CMS regulations and policies are often revised or interpreted by the agency in ways significantly affecting our business and our products.

Other Healthcare Laws and Regulations

If we obtain regulatory approval of our products, we may be subject to various federal and state laws targeting fraud and abuse in the healthcare industry. These laws may impact, among other things, our proposed sales and marketing strategies. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. These laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, privacy and security, and physician sunshine laws and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person from knowingly and willfully offering, soliciting, receiving or paying remuneration (a term interpreted broadly to include anything of value, including, for example, gifts, discounts and credits), directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, an item or reimbursable, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute can result in significant civil monetary and criminal penalties, per kickback plus three times the amount of remuneration and a prison term per violation. Further, violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute can also form the basis for False Claims Act liability (discussed below). A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, many states have adopted laws similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, some of which apply to the referral of patients for healthcare items or services reimbursed by any source, not only government programs.

Additionally, the civil False Claims Act (the “FCA”) prohibits knowingly presenting or causing the presentation of a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to the U.S. government. Actions under the FCA may be brought by the Attorney General or as a qui tam action by a private individual in the name of the government. Violations of the FCA can result in very significant monetary penalties, for each false claim and treble the amount of the government’s damages. Manufacturers can be held liable under the FCA even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims. The federal

Table of Contents

government continues to use the FCA, and the accompanying threat of significant liability, in its investigations and prosecutions of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies throughout the U.S. Such investigations and prosecutions frequently involve, for example, the alleged promotion of products for unapproved uses and other sales and marketing practices. The government has obtained multi-million and multi-billion dollar settlements under the FCA in addition to individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with the FCA and other applicable fraud and abuse laws.

We may be subject to the federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibits, among other things, the offering or transferring of remuneration to a Medicare or Medicaid beneficiary that the person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular supplier of Medicare or Medicaid payable items or services. Federal government price reporting laws require manufacturers to calculate and report complex pricing metrics to government programs.

The U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, includes a fraud and abuse provision referred to as the HIPAA All-Payor Fraud Law, which imposes criminal and civil liability for executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

We may also be subject to federal transparency laws, including the federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act, which was part of the ACA and requires manufacturers of certain drugs and biologics, among others, to track and disclose payments and other transfers of value they make to U.S. physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists, and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests in the manufacturer held by such physicians and their immediate family members. This information is subsequently made publicly available in a searchable format on a CMS website. Failure to disclose required information may result in civil monetary penalties for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately and completely reported in an annual submission. Certain states also mandate implementation of compliance programs, impose restrictions on drug manufacturer marketing practices and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to physicians and/or other healthcare providers.

As noted above, analogous state laws and regulations, such as, state anti-kickback and false claims laws may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers. Some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures. There are also state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives.

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. Federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, imprisonment, exclusion of drugs from government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, as well as additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs. Ensuring business arrangements comply with applicable healthcare

Table of Contents

laws, as well as responding to possible investigations by government authorities, can be time- and resource consuming and can divert a company’s attention from the business.

Data Privacy and Security

In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal information, such as clinical trial data and other health data. Accordingly, we may be subject to numerous data privacy and security obligations, including federal, state, local, and foreign laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements and other obligations related to data privacy and security.

These frameworks are evolving and may impose potentially conflicting obligations. Such obligations may include, without limitation, the Federal Trade Commission Act, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (“CPRA”) (collectively, “CCPA”), the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation 2016/679 (“EU GDPR”), the EU GDPR as it forms part of United Kingdom law by virtue of section 3 of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018 (“UK GDPR”), the ePrivacy Directive, and wiretapping laws. Further. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, imposes certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of protected health information.

Many states also have laws governing the privacy and security of health information and other personal information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. For example, the CCPA applies to personal information of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, places increased privacy and security obligations on entities handling personal information of such California residents or households, requires covered companies to provide certain disclosures to such California residents about its data collection, use and sharing practices, and requires covered companies to provide such California residents with ways to opt-out of certain sales or transfers of personal information. In addition, the CPRA expanded the CCPA’s requirements.

Additionally, European data privacy and security laws (including the EU GDPR and UK GDPR) impose significant and complex compliance obligations on companies that are subject to those laws, notably with respect to the processing of health-related data from EEA or UK-based individuals.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Market acceptance and sales of approved products depends in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these drugs and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed care organizations and other private health insurers. Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a therapy does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for any product candidate, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. Patients are unlikely to use our drugs unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our drugs. A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our current and any future product candidates that we develop.

Government Regulation of Drugs Outside of the United States

To market any product outside of the U.S., we would need to comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, manufacturing, commercial sales and distribution of our products. To obtain a Marketing Authorization, or MA, for a product in the European Economic Area, or the EEA (comprised of the 27 EU Member States plus Iceland, Liechtenstein and Norway), for example an applicant must be established within the EEA. The applicant must submit a Marketing Authorization Application, or MAA, either under a centralized procedure administered by the EMA or one of the procedures administered by competent authorities in the EEA countries

Table of Contents

(decentralized procedure, national procedure or mutual recognition procedure). An MA may be granted only to an applicant established in the EEA.

The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single MA by the European Commission that is valid for all EEA countries. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, the centralized procedure is compulsory for specific products, including for (i) medicinal products derived from biotechnological processes, (ii) products designated as orphan medicinal products, (iii) advanced therapy medicinal products, or ATMPs, and (iv) products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases. For products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of other diseases and products that are highly innovative or for which a centralized process is in the interest of patients, authorization through the centralized procedure is optional on related approval.

Under the centralized procedure, the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP, conducts the initial assessment of a product. The CHMP is also responsible for several post-authorization and maintenance activities, such as the assessment of modifications or extensions to an existing MA. Under the centralized procedure in the EEA, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA is 210 days, excluding clock stops when additional information or written or oral explanation is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions of the CHMP. Accelerated assessment may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product targeting an unmet medical need is expected to be of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts a request for accelerated assessment, the time limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days (excluding clock stops). The CHMP can, however, revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment.

Unlike the centralized authorization procedure, the decentralized MA procedure requires a separate application to, and leads to separate approval by, the competent authorities of each EEA country in which the product is to be marketed. This application is identical to the application that would be submitted to the EMA for authorization through the centralized procedure. The reference Member State prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. The resulting assessment report is submitted to the concerned EEA countries who, within 90 days of receipt, must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a concerned EU Member State cannot approve the assessment report and related materials due to concerns relating to a potential serious risk to public health, disputed elements may be referred to the Heads of Medicines Agencies’ Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures – Human, or CMDh, for review. The subsequent decision of the European Commission is binding on all EEA countries.

The mutual recognition procedure allows companies that have a medicinal product already authorized in one EEA country to apply for this authorization to be recognized by the competent authorities in other EEA countries. Like the decentralized procedure, the mutual recognition procedure is based on the acceptance by the competent authorities of the EEA countries of the MA of a medicinal product by the competent authorities of other EEA countries. The holder of a national MA may submit an application to the competent authority of an EEA country requesting that this authority recognize the MA delivered by the competent authority of another EEA country.

An MA has, in principle, an initial validity of five years. The MA may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk-benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the EEA country in which the original MA was granted. To support the application, the MA holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the eCTD (Common Technical Document) providing up-to-date data concerning the quality, safety and efficacy of the product, including all variations introduced since the MA was granted, at least nine months before the MA ceases to be valid. The European Commission or the competent authorities of the EEA countries may decide on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one further five year renewal period for the MA. Once subsequently definitively renewed, the MA shall be valid for an unlimited period. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the medicinal product on the EU market (for a centralized MA) or on the market of the authorizing EEA country within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause).

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 Priority Medicines, or PRIME, scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicinal products that target unmet

Table of Contents

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

In the EEA, a “conditional” MA may be granted in cases where all the required safety and efficacy data are not yet available. The European Commission may grant a conditional MA for a medicinal product if it is demonstrated that all of the following criteria are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the medicinal product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorization; (iii) the medicinal product fulfils an unmet medical need; and (iv) the benefit of the immediate availability to patients of the medicinal product is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. The conditional MA is subject to conditions to be fulfilled for generating the missing data or ensuring increased safety measures. It is valid for one year and must be renewed annually until all related conditions have been fulfilled. Once any pending studies are provided, the conditional MA can be converted into a traditional MA. However, if the conditions are not fulfilled within the timeframe set by the EMA and approved by the European Commission, the MA will cease to be renewed.

An MA may also be granted “under exceptional circumstances” where the applicant can show that it is unable to provide comprehensive data on efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use even after the product has been authorized and subject to specific procedures being introduced. These circumstances may arise in particular when the intended indications are very rare and, in the state of scientific knowledge at that time, it is not possible to provide comprehensive information, or when generating data may be contrary to generally accepted ethical principles. Like a conditional MA, an MA granted in exceptional circumstances is reserved to medicinal products intended to be authorized for treatment of rare diseases or unmet medical needs for which the applicant does not hold a complete data set that is required for the grant of a standard MA. However, unlike the conditional MA, an applicant for authorization in exceptional circumstances is not subsequently required to provide the missing data. Although the MA “under exceptional circumstances” is granted definitively, the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product is reviewed annually, and the MA will be withdrawn if the risk-benefit ratio is no longer favorable.

Upon grant of a MA in the EEA, innovative medicinal products generally benefit from eight years of data exclusivity and an additional two years of market exclusivity. If granted, data exclusivity prevents generic or biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator's pre-clinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a generic or biosimilar marketing authorization during a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EEA. During the additional two year period of market exclusivity, a generic or biosimilar marketing authorization can be submitted, and the innovator's data may be referenced, but no generic or biosimilar product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity period. The overall ten year period will be extended to a maximum of eleven years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to authorization, is held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies.

In the EEA, 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 such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided in support of an application for marketing authorization. Guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product.

EU Post-Approval Requirements

Where an MA is granted in relation to a medicinal product in the EEA, the holder of the MA is required to comply with a range of regulatory requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. 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 individual EEA countries. The holder of an MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance who is responsible for oversight of that

Table of Contents

system. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports, or PSURs.

All new MAAs must include a risk management plan, or 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.

In the EEA, the advertising and promotion of medicinal products are subject to both EU and EEA countries’ laws governing promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians and other healthcare professionals, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. Although general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products are established under EU legislation, the details are governed by regulations in individual EEA countries and can differ from one country to another. For example, applicable laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics, or SmPC, as approved by the competent authorities in connection with an MA. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians concerning the safe and effective use of the product. Promotional activity that does not comply with the SmPC is considered off-label and is prohibited in the EEA. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicinal products is also prohibited in the EEA.

Orphan designation in the EU

The criteria for designating an “orphan medicinal product” in the EEA are similar in principle to those in the U.S. In the EEA a medicinal product may be designated as orphan if (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify investment; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. Orphan medicinal products are eligible for financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and are, upon grant of a marketing authorization, entitled to ten years of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication. During this ten-year orphan market exclusivity period, no marketing authorization application shall be accepted, and no marketing authorization shall be granted for a similar medicinal product for the same indication. An orphan product can also benefit from an additional two years of market exclusivity in the EU for pediatric studies. The ten-year market exclusivity period 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. Additionally, marketing authorization may be granted to a similar product for the same indication at any time if (i) the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior; (ii) the applicant consents to a second orphan medicinal product application; or (iii) the applicant cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product.

Similar to the United States, the various phases of non-clinical and clinical research in the European Union are subject to significant regulatory controls.

Conduct of clinical trials in the EU

In the EU, clinical trials are governed by the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, or CTR, which entered into application on January 31, 2022 repealing and replacing the former Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20, or CTD, and related national implementing legislation of EU Member States.

The CTR is intended to harmonize and streamline clinical trial authorizations, simplify adverse-event reporting procedures, improve the supervision of clinical trials and increasing their transparency. Specifically, the Regulation, which is directly applicable in all EU Member States, introduces a streamlined application procedure through a single-entry point, the "EU portal", the Clinical Trials Information System, or CTIS; a single set of documents to be prepared and submitted for the application; as well as simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors. A harmonized procedure for the assessment of applications for clinical trials has been introduced and is divided into two parts. Part I assessment is led by the competent authorities of a reference Member State selected by the trial sponsor and relates to clinical trial aspects that are considered to be scientifically harmonized across EU

Table of Contents

Member States. This assessment is then submitted to the competent authorities of all concerned Member States in which the trial is to be conducted for their review. Part II is assessed separately by the competent authorities and Ethics Committees in each concerned EU Member State. Individual EU Member States retain the power to authorize the conduct of clinical trials on their territory.

The extent to which on-going clinical trials will be governed by the CTR will depend on the duration of the individual clinical trial. For clinical trials in relation to which application for approval was made on the basis of the CTD before January 31, 2022, the CTD will continue to apply on a transitional basis for three years. If authorized, those clinical trials will be governed by the CTD until January 31, 2025. By that date, all ongoing trials will become subject to the provisions of the CTR. The CTR will apply to clinical trials from an earlier date if the clinical trial has already transitioned to the CTR framework. Since January 31, 2023 all new requests for approval of clinical trials must be based on the CTR.

Should we utilize third-party distributors, compliance with such foreign governmental regulations would generally be the responsibility of such distributors, who may be independent contractors over whom we have limited control.

The position in the United Kingdom

Following the result of a referendum in 2016, the United Kingdom (UK) left the European Union on January 31, 2020, commonly referred to as Brexit. The UK and the European Union have signed an EU-UK Trade and Cooperation Agreement, or TCA, which became provisionally applicable on January 1, 2021 and entered into force on May 1, 2021. The Annex provides a framework for the recognition of Good Manufacturing Practice, or GMP, inspections and for the exchange and acceptance of official GMP documents. The regime does not, however, extended to procedures such as batch release certification.

As part of the TCA, the European Union and the UK will recognize Good Manufacturing Practice inspections carried out by the other party and the acceptance of official GMP documents issued by the other party. The TCA also encourages, although it does not oblige, the parties to consult one another on proposals to introduce significant changes to technical regulations or inspection procedures. Among the areas of absence of mutual recognition are batch testing and batch release. The UK has unilaterally agreed to accept European Union batch testing and batch release However, the European Union continues to apply European Union laws that require batch testing and batch release to take place in the European Union territory. This means that medicinal products that are tested and released in the UK must be retested and re-released when entering the European Union market for commercial use.

As regards marketing authorizations, Great Britain has a separate regulatory submission process, approval process and a national marketing authorization. Northern Ireland will, however, continue to be covered by the marketing authorizations granted by the European Commission. Since January 1, 2021, an applicant for a centralized procedure marketing authorization can no longer be established in the UK. Since this date, companies established in the UK cannot use the centralized procedure and instead must follow one of the UK national authorization procedures to obtain an MA to market products in the UK. The MHRA has been updating various aspects of the regulatory regime for medicinal products in the UK. These include: introducing the Innovative Licensing and Access Procedure to accelerate the time to market and facilitate patient access for innovative medicinal products; updates to the UK national approval procedure, introducing a 150-day objective for assessing applications for marketing authorizations in the UK, Great Britain and Northern Ireland and a rolling review process for marketing authorization applications (rather than a consolidated full dossier submission).

Orphan designation in Great Britain following Brexit is, unlike in the EU, not available pre-marketing authorization. Applications for orphan designation are made at the same time as an application for a marketing authorization. The criteria to be granted an orphan medicinal product designation or essentially identical to those in the EU but based on the prevalence of the condition in Great Britain.

The UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from existing EU legislation (as implemented into UK law, through secondary legislation). However, it is currently unclear to what extent the UK will seek to align its regulations with the EU following entry into application of the Clinical Trials Regulation on January 31, 2022.

Table of Contents

U.S. Patent Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity

Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA approval of our future product candidates, some of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit restoration of the patent term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. Patent-term restoration, however, cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date and only those claims covering such approved drug product, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. The patent-term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of an NDA plus the time between the submission date of an NDA and the approval of that application, except that the review period is reduced by any time during which the applicant failed to exercise due diligence. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The USPTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we may apply for restoration of patent term for our currently owned or licensed patents to add patent life beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant NDA.

Marketing exclusivity provisions under the FD&C Act also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FD&C Act provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the United States to the first applicant to gain 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 accept for review an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for another version of such drug 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. The FD&C Act also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, 505(b)(2) 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 conditions of use associated with the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the original active agent. 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.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2022, we had twenty-eight full-time employees and three part-time employees. Fourteen employees are based in Barcelona, Spain, eleven employees are based in Lugano, Switzerland, two employees are based in the U.K. and four employees are based in Bethesda, Maryland. Of these thirty-one employees, twenty-two are engaged in research and development activities and nine are engaged in finance, investor relations, business development and general management. Our employees in Spain are subject to a national collective labor agreement, the “Convenio General de la Industria Quimica”. National agreements are negotiated collectively between the national associations of companies within a given industry and the respective national unions. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good and have not experienced any work stoppages. In addition, we maintain consulting arrangements with a number of scientists at various universities and other research institutions in Europe, Switzerland and the United States, including with the four external members of our Scientific Advisory Board. Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and additional employees. We maintain our equity incentive plan in order to attract, retain and incentivize our workforce through the granting of stock-based compensation. We also provide cash bonus awards based on Company progress toward key annual goals and employee performance.

Available Information

We maintain an internet website at www.gaintherapeutics.com and make available free of charge through our website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Exchange Act of 1934, or the Exchange Act. We make these reports available through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we

Table of Contents

electronically file such reports with, or furnish such reports to, the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC. You can review our electronically filed reports and other information that we file with the SEC on the SEC’s web site at http://www.sec.gov. In addition, we regularly use our website to post information regarding our business, product development programs and governance, and we encourage investors to use our website, specifically the section titled “Investor Relations” as a source of information about us. The information on our website is not incorporated by reference into this Annual Report and should not be considered to be part of this Annual Report. Our website address is included in this Annual Report as an inactive technical reference only.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Investing in our securities involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the following risks and other information in this Annual Report in evaluating us and our Common Stock. Any of the following risks could materially and adversely affect our results of operations, our financial condition, and the market price of our Common Stock. Although the risk factors are grouped by general category, many of the risks described in a given category relate to multiple categories. The risks described below are not the only ones that we face. Additional risks not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also affect our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition. See “Cautionary Statement Regarding Forward-Looking Statements” in this Annual Report. If any of these risks actually materialize, our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations could be seriously harmed. This could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline, resulting in a loss of all or part of your investment.

Risk Factor Summary

We are providing the following summary of the risk factors contained in this Annual Report to enhance the readability and accessibility of our risk factor disclosures. We encourage you to carefully review the full risk factors contained in this Annual Report in their entirety for additional information regarding the material factors that make an investment in our securities speculative or risky. These risks and uncertainties include, but are not limited to, the following:

◾ we are subject to extensive and costly government regulation;

Table of Contents

Risks Related to Our Business

We have a history of operating losses and expect to incur losses for the foreseeable future. We may never generate revenues or, if we are able to generate revenues, achieve profitability.

We are focused on product development, and we have not generated any significant revenues to date. We have incurred losses in each year of our operations, and we expect to continue to incur operating losses for the foreseeable future. These operating losses have adversely affected and are likely to continue to adversely affect our working capital, total assets and shareholders’ equity.

We and our prospects should be examined in light of the risks and difficulties frequently encountered by new and early-stage companies in new and rapidly evolving markets. These risks include, among other things, the speed at which we can scale up operations, our complete dependence upon development of our product candidates that currently have no market acceptance, our ability to establish and expand our brand name, our ability to expand our operations to meet the commercial demand of our clients, our development of and reliance on strategic and customer relationships and our ability to minimize fraud and other security risks.

The process of developing our product candidates requires significant time, effort and expenses in preclinical, clinical and regulatory development. In addition, commercialization of our product candidates will require that we obtain necessary regulatory approvals and establish sales, marketing and manufacturing capabilities, either through internal hiring or through contractual relationships with others. We expect to incur substantial additional operating expenses over the next several years as our research, development, preclinical studies and clinical trial activities increase. Product candidates in later stages of clinical development generally incur higher development costs than those in earlier stages of clinical development, primarily due to the increased size and duration of later-stage clinical trials. As a result, we expect that our research and development expenses will continue to increase in the foreseeable future as we (i) increase personnel costs, including stock-based compensation, (ii) continue preclinical development of our lead compounds, (iii) initiate clinical trials for certain product candidates, (iv) continue to discover and develop additional product candidates, and (v) pursue later stages of clinical development of product candidates.

The amount of future losses and when, if ever, we will achieve profitability are uncertain. We have no products that have generated any commercial revenue, do not expect to generate revenues from the commercial sale of products in the foreseeable future, and might never generate revenues from the sale of products. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability will depend on, among other things, successful completion of preclinical development and testing and clinical trials of our product candidates; obtaining necessary regulatory approvals from the FDA; establishing manufacturing, sales and marketing arrangements with third parties; successfully commercializing our products; establishing a favorable competitive position; and raising sufficient funds to finance our activities. Many of these factors will depend on circumstances beyond our control. We might not succeed at any of these undertakings. If we are unsuccessful at some or all of these undertakings, our business, prospects and results of operations may be materially adversely affected.

Table of Contents

We have a limited operating history and we expect a number of factors to cause our operating results to fluctuate on a quarterly and annual basis, which may make it difficult to predict our future performance.

We are a preclinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. Our operations to date have been primarily limited to organizing and staffing our company, expanding its operations, performing research, acquiring, developing and securing our in-licensed technology and preclinical development of our product candidates. We have not yet begun or successfully completed any clinical trials, completed Investigational New Drug (“IND”) enabling or Good Laboratory Practice (“GLP”) compliant studies for any of our product candidates, manufactured our products candidates at clinical or commercial scale or conducted sales and marketing activities that will be necessary to successfully commercialize our product candidates. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or commercialized products. Our financial condition has varied significantly in the past and will continue to fluctuate from quarter-to-quarter or year-to-year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control. Factors relating to our business that may contribute to these fluctuations include, among other factors described elsewhere in this Annual Report:

● delays in the commencement, enrollment and timing of clinical trials;

● market acceptance of our product candidates;

Table of Contents

● potential product liability claims.

Accordingly, the results of any quarterly or annual periods should not be relied upon as indications of future operating performance.

Risks Related to Product Development, Regulatory Approval, Manufacturing and Commercialization

We may conduct certain of our clinical trials for our product candidates outside of the U.S. which, among other risks, exposes us to the possibility that the FDA and other foreign equivalents may not accept data from such trials, in which case our development plans will be delayed, which could materially harm our business.

We expect to complete the preclinical development and submit the regulatory dossier to the Human Research Ethics Committee in Australia to initiate a first-in-human Phase 1 clinical trial in our Parkinson’s disease program. Although the FDA may accept data from clinical trials conducted outside the U.S., acceptance of this data is subject to certain conditions imposed by the FDA. Where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the U.S., the FDA will not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless those data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; the studies were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence; and the data are considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA or, if the FDA considers such an inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. For studies that are conducted only at sites outside of the U.S. and not subject to an IND, the FDA requires the clinical trial to have been conducted in accordance with GCPs, and the FDA must be able to validate the data from the clinical trial through an on-site inspection if it deems such inspection necessary. For such studies not subject to an IND, the FDA generally does not provide advance comment on the clinical protocols for the studies, and therefore there is an additional potential risk that the FDA could determine that the study design or protocol for a non-U.S. clinical trial was inadequate, which could require us to conduct additional clinical trials. There can be no assurance the FDA will accept data from clinical trials conducted outside of the U.S. If the FDA does not accept data from our clinical trials of our product candidates conducted outside of the U.S., it would likely result in the need for additional clinical trials, which would be costly and time consuming and delay or permanently halt our development of our product candidates.

Conducting clinical trials outside the U.S. also exposes us to additional risks, including risks associated with:

● additional foreign regulatory requirements;

● foreign exchange fluctuations;

● cultural differences in medical practice and clinical research; and

● diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries.

By extension, clinical trials that are predominantly conducted in the United States or primarily based on feedback from the FDA may not result in sufficiently diverse patient populations to warrant approval in other countries (for example, Japan) or those other health authorities may have differences of opinion on appropriateness of trial design or differences in interpretation of some data. In those situations, approvals in other countries outside the United States may be delayed or never approved, which would materially detract from the commercial success of any impacted product candidates.

If preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates cannot be initiated or completed or if they are delayed or unsuccessful, we will be unable to meet our future development and commercialization goals.

We rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, including contract research organizations (“CROs”) and outside consultants, to conduct, supervise or monitor some or all aspects of preclinical studies and clinical trials

Table of Contents

involving our product candidates. We have less control over the timing and other aspects of these preclinical studies and clinical trials than if we performed the monitoring and supervision entirely on our own. Third parties may not perform their responsibilities for our preclinical studies and clinical trials on our anticipated schedule or, for clinical trials, consistent with a clinical trial protocol. Delays in preclinical studies and clinical trials could significantly increase our product development costs and delay product commercialization. In addition, many of the factors that may cause, or lead to, a delay in the clinical trials may also ultimately lead to denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate.

The commencement of clinical trials can be delayed for a variety of reasons, including delays in:

● reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and study sites;

● developing a stable formulation of a product candidate;

● manufacturing sufficient quantities of a product candidate; and

Once a clinical trial has begun, it may be delayed, suspended or terminated by us or the FDA or other regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including:

● failure to conduct clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements;

● lack of adequate funding to continue clinical trials;

● negative results of clinical trials;

● investigational drug product out-of-specification; or

If clinical trials are unsuccessful, and we are not able to obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates under development, we will not be able to commercialize these products, and therefore may not be able to generate sufficient revenues to support our business.

The disorders we seek to treat have low prevalence and it may be difficult to identify patients with these disorders, which may lead to delays in enrollment for our trials or slower commercial revenue if approved, and we may also face enrollment challenges as a result of other factors.

Genetically defined disorders generally, and especially those for which our current product candidates are targeted, have low incidence and prevalence. We expect to rely in part on relationships with clinical centers of excellence, key opinion leaders and patient advocacy groups to assist in identifying eligible patients, and any deterioration of those relationships could impede our ability to successfully enroll patients. Patient enrollment may be affected by other factors including:

● the severity of the disease under investigation;

Table of Contents

● design of the study protocol;

● the eligibility criteria for the trial;

● our efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials;

● the patient referral practices of physicians; and

GANX US Equity

GANX · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

GANX US Equity☆

GANX · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

GANX US Equity