gnpx20221231_10k.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2022

Commission File Number 001-38244

Genprex, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in Its Charter)

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (877) 774-4679

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

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

Common Stock, par value $0.001 per share GNPX The Nasdaq Capital Market

Securities registered pursuant to 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 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.

Large accelerated filer: ☐ Accelerated filer ☐

Non-accelerated filer: ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒

Emerging growth company ☒

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

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

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 voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the registrant as of June 30, 2022 was approximately $66 million, computed by reference to the closing price of the registrant’s common stock on June 30, 2022 (the last business day of the registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter) of $1.39 per share, as reported by The Nasdaq Capital Market.

As of March 15, 2023, there were 51,974,078 shares of the registrant’s common stock outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, subsequent to the date hereof pursuant to Regulation 14A in connection with the registrant’s 2023 annual meeting of stockholders, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Such proxy statement will be filed with the SEC not later than 120 days after the conclusion of the registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2022.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

PART I 2

Item 1. Business 2

Item 1A. Risk Factors 46

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 76

Item 2. Properties 76

Item 3. Legal Proceedings 76

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 76

Item 6. [Reserved] 77

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 85

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 85

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 86

Item 9B. Other Information 87

Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections 87

PART III 88

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 88

Item 11. Executive Compensation 88

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services 88

Item 15. Exhibits and Financial Statement Schedules 88

SIGNATURES 93

FINANCIAL STATEMENTS F-1

CAUTIONARY NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Annual Report on Form 10-K” or this “Annual Report”) contains forward-looking statements that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. Unless the context requires otherwise, references to “Genprex,” the “Company,” “we,” “us” or “our” in this Annual Report refer to Genprex, Inc. Any statements in this Annual Report about our expectations, beliefs, plans, objectives, assumptions or future events or performance are not historical facts and are forward-looking statements. These statements are often, but not always, made through the use of words or phrases such as “believe,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “estimate,” “intend,” “plan” and “would.” For example, statements concerning financial condition, possible or assumed future results of operations, growth opportunities, industry ranking, plans and objectives of management, markets for our common stock and future management and organizational structure are all forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements are not guarantees of performance. They involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions that may cause actual results, levels of activity, performance or achievements to differ materially from any results, levels of activity, performance or achievements expressed or implied by any forward-looking statement.

Any forward-looking statements are qualified in their entirety by reference to the risk factors discussed throughout this Annual Report. Some of the risks, uncertainties and assumptions that could cause actual results to differ materially from estimates or projections contained in the forward-looking statements include but are not limited to:

• Market conditions;

• Our capital position;

• Our uncertainty of developing marketable products;

• Our ability to develop and commercialize our products;

• Our ability to obtain regulatory approvals;

• The success of our clinical trials through all phases of clinical development;

• Our ability to control product development costs;

• Our ability to attract and retain key employees;

• The possibility that there may be no market acceptance for our products; and

The foregoing list sets forth some, but not all, of the factors that could affect our ability to achieve results described in any forward-looking statements, which speak only as of the date of this Annual Report. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation and expressly disclaim any duty to update any forward-looking statement to reflect events or circumstances after the date of this Annual Report or to reflect the occurrence of unanticipated events. In addition, we cannot assess the impact of each factor on our business or the extent to which any factor, or combination of factors, may cause actual results to differ materially from those contained in any forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report. All forward-looking statements are expressly qualified in their entirety by the cautionary statements contained in this section.

PART I

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a clinical stage gene therapy company pioneering the development of gene-based therapies for large patient populations with unmet medical needs. Our oncology platform utilizes our non-viral ONCOPREX® Nanoparticle Delivery System. Using this system, plasmids containing tumor suppressor genes, which are deleted early in the development of cancer, are encapsulated within lipid nanoparticles and administered intravenously to the patient to re-express the deleted tumor suppressor genes. Our diabetes technology is designed to work in Type 1 diabetes by transforming alpha cells in the pancreas into functional beta-like cells, which can produce insulin but are distinct enough from beta cells to evade the body’s immune system. In Type 2 diabetes, our technology is believed to work by replenishing and rejuvenating the beta cells that make insulin.

Oncology Platform

Our lead oncology drug candidate, REQORSA® Immunogene Therapy (generic name: quaratusugene ozeplasmid), previously referred to as GPX-001, is initially being developed in combination with top selling cancer drugs to treat Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer (“NSCLC”) and Small Cell Lung Cancer (“SCLC”). The active agent in REQORSA is a plasmid that expresses a tumor suppressor gene named TUSC2. REQORSA has a multimodal mechanism of action whereby it interrupts cell signaling pathways that cause replication and proliferation of cancer cells, re-establishes pathways for apoptosis, or programmed cell death, in cancer cells, and modulates the immune response against cancer cells. REQORSA has been shown to be complementary with targeted drugs and immunotherapies. We believe REQORSA’s unique attributes position REQORSA to provide treatment for patients with NSCLC, SCLC, and possibly other cancers, and that it can improve on current therapies.

Acclaim – 1: We currently are enrolling and treating patients in the Phase 1 dose escalation portion of our Phase 1/2 Acclaim-1 clinical trial. The Acclaim-1 trial uses a combination of REQORSA and AstraZeneca PLC’s Tagrisso® in patients with late-stage NSCLC that has activating epidermal growth factor receptor (“EGFR”) mutations and progression after treatment with Tagrisso. In August 2022, the Acclaim-1 Safety Review Committee (“Acclaim-1 SRC”) approved escalating the dose from 0.06 mg/kg in the first cohort of patients to 0.09 mg/kg in the second cohort of patients and in December 2022, the SRC approved escalating the dose from 0.09 mg/kg in the second cohort to 0.12 mg/kg in the third and final cohort. We are thus enrolling and treating patients at the 0.12 mg/kg dose level. We expect enrollment in the dose escalation portion of the study to be completed in the next several days following the filing of this Annual Report. After completion of enrollment and cycle one of treatment for the remaining untreated patients, the Acclaim-1 SRC will meet and establish the maximum tolerated dose ("MTD") or recommended Phase 2 dose ("RP2D"). We will then proceed into the dose expansion portion of the study. The Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) has granted Fast Track Designation for the Acclaim-1 treatment combination of REQORSA and Tagrisso in NSCLC patients who have progressed after Tagrisso treatment.

Acclaim – 2: We currently are enrolling and treating patients in the Phase 1 dose escalation portion of our Phase 1/2 Acclaim-2 clinical trial. The Acclaim-2 trial uses a combination of REQORSA and Merck & Co.’s Keytruda® in patients with late-stage NSCLC whose disease has progressed after treatment with Keytruda. Patients are currently being treated at the 0.06 mg/kg dose level in the first cohort of patients and, subject to Acclaim-2 Safety Review Committee ("Acclaim-2 SRC") approval, will be treated at successive dose levels of 0.09 mg/kg and 0.12 mg/kg. In March 2023, we amended the Acclaim-2 protocol to include additional treatments in the control group with the goal of accelerating enrollment in the study by making the trial more attractive to a wider variety of investigators. We expect enrollment in the dose escalation portion of the study to be completed by the end of 2023. We will then evaluate patients in the dose expansion portion of the study at the MTD or RP2D. The FDA has granted Fast Track Designation for the Acclaim-2 treatment combination of REQORSA and Keytruda in NSCLC patients who have progressed after Keytruda treatment.

The dose expansion portion of Acclaim-2 is a Phase 2 study and the dose expansion portion of Acclaim-1 will be considered a Phase 2 study upon the filing with the FDA of an upcoming protocol amendment. The dose expansion provides us the advantage of early insight into drug effectiveness in defined and distinct patient populations at the MTD or RP2D in order to better evaluate efficacy and increase the likelihood of a successful randomized Phase 2 trial which will follow the dose expansion portion of each study.

Acclaim – 3: In November 2022, we filed with the FDA our protocol for our Phase 1/2 Acclaim-3 clinical trial using a combination of REQORSA and Genentech, Inc.’s Tecentriq® as maintenance therapy in patients with extensive stage small cell lung cancer (“ES-SCLC”) who did not develop tumor progression after receiving Tecentriq and chemotherapy as initial standard treatment. We expect to dose the first patient in Acclaim-3 by the end of the third quarter of 2023. Patients will be treated with REQORSA and Tecentriq until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity is experienced.

The TUSC2 gene is one of a series of genes on the short arm of Chromosome 3 whose therapeutic use is covered by our exclusive worldwide licenses from The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center ("MD Anderson"). We believe that our ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System allows for delivery of a number of cancer-fighting genes, alone or in combination with other cancer therapies, to combat multiple types of cancer and are in early stages of discovery programs to identify early-stage candidates. In August 2022, we entered into a sponsored research agreement with MD Anderson to support further pre-clinical studies of TUSC2 and other tumor suppressor genes.

Diabetes Gene Therapy

In diabetes, we have exclusively licensed from the University of Pittsburgh of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education (“University of Pittsburgh”) multiple technologies relating to the development of a gene therapy product for each of Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. The same general novel approach is used in each of Type 1 and Type 2 whereby an adeno-associated virus (“AAV”) vector containing the Pdx1 and MafA genes is administered directly into the pancreatic duct. In humans, this can be done with a routine endoscopy procedure. Our diabetes product candidates are currently being evaluated and optimized in preclinical studies at the University of Pittsburgh. GPX-002 is being developed for the treatment of Type 1 diabetes and GPX-003 is being developed for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes. GPX-002 is designed to work by transforming alpha cells in the pancreas into functional beta-like cells, which can produce insulin but are distinct enough from beta cells to evade the body’s immune system. GPX-003 is believed to work by replenishing and rejuvenating the beta cells that make insulin. We expect to finalize our constructs and meet with the FDA before the end of 2023 to obtain their guidance on the toxicology studies that we plan to conduct. In August 2022, we entered into a one-year sponsored research agreement with the University of Pittsburgh for the use of GPX-003 in a non-human primate (“NHP”) model in Type 2 diabetes and we expect data from this study to be reported by the end of 2023. In February 2023, the Company’s research collaborators at the University of Pittsburgh presented preclinical data in a NHP model of Type 1 diabetes highlighting the therapeutic potential of GPX-002 at the 16th International Conference on Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD 2023) in Berlin, Germany. The statistically significant study results showed the treated animals had decreased insulin requirements, increased c-peptide levels, and improved glucose tolerance compared to baseline.

Recent Developments - Financings

At-the-Market Offering Program

On November 18, 2022, we entered into an Equity Distribution Agreement (the “Equity Distribution Agreement”) with JMP Securities LLC, serving as placement agent (“JMP Securities” or the “Agent”) with respect to an at-the-market offering program (our “ATM”) under which we may offer and sell, from time to time at our sole discretion, shares of our common stock, having an aggregate offering price of up to $50.0 million through the Agent. We have agreed to pay the Agent a commission equal to three percent (3%) of the gross sales proceeds of any shares sold through the Agent under the Equity Distribution Agreement, and also have provided the Agent with customary indemnification and contribution rights. As of December 31, 2022 we have sold 3,886 shares of our common stock for aggregate net proceeds to us totaling approximately $4,532.

Registered Direct Offering

On March 1, 2023, we completed a registered direct offering, in which we sold to an accredited healthcare-focused institutional investor an aggregate of 3,809,524 shares of our common stock and warrants to purchase up to 3,809,524 shares of our common stock, at a combined offering price of $1.05 per share of common stock and accompanying warrant. The warrants are exercisable immediately upon issuance, expire 5 years from the date of issuance and have an exercise price of $1.10 per share. We received net proceeds of approximately $3.6 million after commissions and estimated expenses, excluding any proceeds that may be received in the future from any exercise of the warrants.

Our Pipeline

Our technologies are designed to administer disease-fighting genes to provide new treatment options for large patient populations with cancer and diabetes who currently have limited treatment options. We are developing our lead product candidate REQORSA to be administered with targeted therapies and with immunotherapies for NSCLC and SCLC. We continue to conduct preclinical research to explore how REQORSA may be administered with targeted therapies and immunotherapies in other solid tumors, and we are researching how other cancer fighting genes can enhance our portfolio using our non-viral gene therapy platform, the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System. Using a different gene therapy delivery system, we are also developing our pre-clinical diabetes candidates, GPX-002 and GPX-003. The following table summarizes our product development pipeline.

Introduction – Cancer

Cancer and Genetic Mutations. Cancer results from genetic mutations. Mutations that lead to cancer are usually present in two major classes of genes: oncogenes, which are involved in functions such as signal transduction and transcription; and tumor suppressor genes, which play a role in governing cell proliferation by regulating transcription. Transduction is the process by which chemical and physical signals are transmitted through cells. Transcription is the process by which a cell’s DNA sequence is copied to make RNA molecules, which then can lead to protein expression. In cancer cells, the oncogene mutations may overwhelm the natural tumor suppression processes, or those tumor suppression processes may be impaired or absent. Functional alterations due to mutations in oncogenes or tumor suppressor genes may result in the abnormal and uncontrolled growth patterns characteristic of cancer. These genetic alterations facilitate such malignant growth by affecting signal transduction pathways and transcription, thus inhibiting normal growth signaling in the cell, circumventing the natural process of apoptosis, evading the immune system’s response to cancer, and inducing angiogenesis, which is the formation of new blood vessels that supply cancer cells.

The most common genetic alterations present in lung cancer are in tumor suppressor genes. No targeted small molecule drugs have successfully been developed against tumor suppressor gene mutations in NSCLC or SCLC.

Another genetic condition often associated with lung cancer are mutations of tyrosine kinases. Tyrosine kinases are enzymes that play an important role in signal transduction through the modification of proteins by adding (phosphorylation) phosphate groups on the amino acid tyrosine, to change the proteins’ function. When an EGFR ligand binds to the EGFR, two EGFR transmembrane proteins are brought close together on the cell membrane surface, and the intracellular tyrosine kinase domains can autophosphorylate, and activate downstream processes, including cell signaling pathways that can lead to cell growth and proliferation. EGFRs can act similarly to a switch that turns “on” and “off” when phosphate groups are either added or taken away. Mutated kinases can have a malfunctioning on/off switch, causing the switch to be stuck in the “on” position leading to the loss of control of cell growth.

Cancer and the Immune System. Cancer can also spread when the body’s natural immune functions are impaired, including by the cancer cells themselves. PD-1, or Programmed Death-1, is a receptor expressed on the surface of activated T cells, which are part of the body’s immune system. PD-L1 is a ligand for PD-1 which is expressed on the surface of cancer and other cells. The binding of PD-1 to PD-L1 has been speculated to contribute to cancer cells’ ability to evade the body’s immune response. PD-1 and similar molecules are called immune checkpoint inhibitors because they can impede the normal immune response, for example by blocking the T cells from attacking the cancer cells. In many cancers, PD-L1 is up-regulated. Substantial research has been performed in the emerging field of immuno-oncology to discover drugs or antibodies that could block PD-L1 and similar receptors. It is believed that blocking the PD-1/PD-L1 interaction pathway and other similar checkpoints, such as cytotoxic T-lymphocyte-associated protein 4, or CTLA-4, with drugs called checkpoint inhibitors can prevent cancer cells from inactivating T cells, leading to an attack of the immune system on the cancer.

Current Treatment of NSCLC. Chemotherapy is the standard treatment for the majority of NSCLC patients, as it is for many other cancer patients. Because it is a non-selective systemic treatment, rather than a targeted approach to treating cancer, chemotherapy also kills healthy cells and has a number of other undesirable side effects.

A subset of NSCLC patients carry one or both of two EGFR mutations, referred to as exon 19 deletion and exon 21 substitution, which make their tumors sensitive to EGFR tyrosine kinase inhibitors ("EGFR TKIs"). Several pharmacological and biological approaches, including EGFR TKIs, have been developed specifically to block activated EGFR for cancer therapy. EGFR TKI drugs are the most common targeted therapies used in lung cancer. Several EGFR TKI therapies are marketed commercially including, but not limited to, Tagrisso, Tarceva, Iressa and Gilotrif.

Approximately 17% of NSCLC patients of North American and European descent and approximately 30% to 50% of NSCLC patients of Asian descent have activating EGFR mutations. This means that the majority of NSCLC patients do not have activating EGFR mutations and are therefore “EGFR negative” and not optimal candidates for EGFR TKIs.

However, while EGFR TKIs are most effective in patients who have an activating EGFR mutation and are therefore described as “EGFR positive,” they are significantly less effective in overall NSCLC populations and are generally not effective in patients without an activating EGFR mutation.

In addition, even among those patients who are EGFR positive and benefit from EGFR TKI therapy, nearly all eventually become resistant to and ultimately no longer respond to EGFR TKI therapy, resulting in eventual disease progression. For example, according to the FLAURA study, sponsored by AstraZeneca, the median time to tumor progression for lung cancer patients on Tagrisso is approximately 18 months. Furthermore, clinical trials have shown that combining EGFR TKIs with conventional chemotherapy does not increase survival for lung cancer patients.

Current Treatment of SCLC. SCLC is staged as limited stage, in which the cancer is only on one side of the chest and can be treated with a single radiation therapy field, or as extensive stage (ES), which includes all other patients. Since SCLC is an aggressive disease, the vast majority of patients have extensive stage SCLC. The standard treatment for ES-SCLC for many years was a combination chemotherapy with carboplatin and etoposide for 4 cycles of treatment, as treatment for longer duration or treatment including other agents was not shown to be beneficial. In the last several years the addition of immune checkpoint inhibitors has been shown to have improved efficacy when added to 4 cycles of chemotherapy. Thus, standard treatment now consists of either Tecentriq or Imfinzi added to 4 cycles of carboplatin and etoposide, and then Tecentriq or Imfinzi are continued as maintenance therapy until disease progression.

However, treatment of ES-SCLC is not curative, and patients progress quickly. In patients receiving Tecentriq and chemotherapy, the PFS after starting maintenance Tecentriq is only 2.6 months. Further improvements in the treatment of ES-SCLC are needed.

Epidemiology of Lung Cancer. According to the World Health Organization in 2020, lung cancer was the leading cause of cancer deaths worldwide, causing more deaths than colorectal, breast, liver, or stomach cancers and accounting for about one in five of all cancer deaths in the United States, making it the leading cause of cancer death in the U.S. with more people dying of lung cancer in the U.S. than of colon, breast and prostate cancers combined. In 2020, there were more than 2 million new lung cancer cases and approximately 1.8 million deaths from lung cancer worldwide. In the United States, according to the American Cancer Society, it is estimated that in 2023 there will be more than 238,000 new cases of lung cancer and more than 127,000 deaths from this disease. NSCLC represents about 82% of all lung cancers and the five-year survival rate for patients with NSCLC with distant spread is 7 percent. SCLC represents about 14% of lung cancer patients and the five-year survival rate for patients with SCLC with distant spread is 3 percent. With limited benefit from current therapies, we believe there is a significant unmet medical need for new treatments for NSCLC and SCLC in the United States and globally, and we believe REQORSA may be suitable for the majority of lung cancer patients.

REQORSA®

REQORSA® immunogene therapy (generic name: quaratusugene ozeplasmid) is designed to (i) interrupt cell signaling pathways that cause replication and proliferation of cancer cells, (ii) target and kill cancer cells, and (iii) stimulate the natural immune responses against cancer. REQORSA is an immunogene therapy in that it combines features of gene therapy and immunotherapy. It up-regulates TUSC2 expression in the cell, and also increases the anti-tumor immune cell population and down-regulates PD-L1, thereby potentially boosting the immune response to cancer.

REQORSA consists of the TUSC2 gene expressing plasmid encapsulated in non-viral nanoparticles made from lipid molecules (our ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System) with a positive electrical charge. REQORSA is injected intravenously and specifically targets cancer cells. Cancer cells have elevated metabolism compared to healthy cells and as a result, are negatively charged compared to healthy cells, which are positively charged, or charge neutral. REQORSA is designed to deliver the functioning TUSC2 gene to cancer cells while minimizing their uptake by normal tissue. Tumor biopsy studies conducted at MD Anderson show that, in three patients, the uptake of TUSC2 in tumor cells after REQORSA treatment was 10 to 33 times the uptake in normal cells. We believe that REQORSA is the first systemic gene therapy to be used for cancer in humans. Since REQORSA, unlike many other gene therapies, is administered intravenously, it does not need to integrate into the patient's DNA. Many other gene therapies require complex procedures, such as removal of cells from a patient and modification of those cells which are then reinfused into the patient, and many lead to permanent changes in a patient's DNA.

Many approved cancer therapeutics target only single molecules or a single specific genetic abnormality related to driving the proliferation and survival of cancer cells. In contrast, REQORSA has been shown to have a multimodal mechanism of action whereby it interrupts cell signaling pathways that cause replication and proliferation of cancer cells, re-establishes pathways for programmed cell death (apoptosis) in cancer cells, and modulates the immune response against cancer cells. REQORSA also has been shown to be complementary with targeted drugs and immunotherapies.

Resistance to targeted drugs and checkpoint inhibitors develop through activation of alternate bypass pathways. For example, when PD-1 is blocked, the TIM-3 checkpoint is up-regulated. We believe that REQORSA’s multimodal activity will block emerging bypass pathways, thereby potentially reducing the probability that drug resistance develops.

Our preclinical and clinical data indicate that REQORSA is well tolerated and may be effective alone or in combination with targeted small molecule therapies. Preclinical data indicate that REQORSA may also be effective with immunotherapies, and in a three-drug combination with immunotherapy and chemotherapy. These data suggest that REQORSA, when combined with other therapies, may be effective in a large population of lung cancer patients.

TUSC2, the Active Agent in REQORSA®

TUSC2 is a multifunctional gene that plays a vital role in cancer suppression and normal cell regulation. Key TUSC2 anti-cancer mechanisms of action include the inactivation of multiple oncogenic kinases, the induction of apoptosis, the control of cell signaling and inflammation, and modulation of the immune system to fight cancer. REQORSA has been shown to be complementary with targeted drugs and immunotherapies. Our pre-clinical data indicate that REQORSA in combination with both EGFR TKIs and with immunotherapies can achieve results more favorable than results achieved with either REQORSA or such other therapies alone, and may make those drugs effective for patients with drug resistance who would not otherwise benefit from them.

Normal TUSC2 function is often inactivated at the early onset of cancer development, making TUSC2 a potential target for all stages of cancer, including metastatic disease. The TUSC2 protein is reduced or absent in approximately 82% of NSCLCs and in 100% of SCLCs. In patients with NSCLC, the loss of TUSC2 expression has been associated with significantly worse overall survival than when TUSC2 expression is not decreased.

Studies show TUSC2 protein functions as a key mediator in the Apaf1-mediated mitochondrial apoptosis pathway by recruiting and directing cytoplasmic Apaf1 protein to a critical cellular location and activating it in situ, thereby up-regulating activity of other proapoptotic effectors. TUSC2 functions to mediate apoptosis in cancer cells through interaction with Apaf1 and also down-regulates multiple tyrosine kinases that regulate cell growth, including EGFR, AKT, platelet-derived growth factor receptor ("PDGFR"), c-Kit, and c-Abl.

In normal cells, the proteins involved in the PI3K/AKT/mTOR pathway play an important role in cellular function and cellular trafficking. In this pathway, PI3K, a kinase, generates messenger molecules required to translocate AKT, another protein kinase, to the cell’s plasma membrane where it is phosphorylated and activated. These proteins are often found to be aberrantly active in cancers, causing cells to lose their ability to control cell growth, proliferation, and differentiation. Thus, mutations in PI3K (overexpression) and its upstream activators, such as EGFR, have been associated with many forms of cancers.

Similarly, proteins in the Ras/MAPK pathway, which is a signal transduction pathway that transduces signals to the cell nucleus where specific genes are activated for cell growth, division and differentiation, play a critical role in cellular responses to various stress stimuli, including osmotic stress, DNA damage, and inflammation. As shown in the figures below, the TUSC2 protein, a potent pan-kinase inhibitor, blocks multiple cell-signaling pathways downstream of the receptor (EGFR in the figures), leading to cell cycle interruption and thereby preventing cancer cell proliferation and survival.

Under stress conditions, such as oncogenic stress, cells go through a regulated process of programmed cell death, also known as apoptosis. As illustrated in the schematic below, the TUSC2 protein interacts via various apoptotic signaling pathways such as Apa1 to stimulate programmed cell death via the release of caspases, enzymes that play a significant role in apoptosis.

Pan-Kinase Inhibition by TUSC2

Stimulation of Apoptotic Signaling by TUSC2

Our clinical and preclinical data indicate that the combination of REQORSA with EGFR TKIs, may increase anti-tumor activity in cancers with or without EGFR mutations and in cancers that have become resistant to EGFR TKI therapy, thus expanding the number of patients who could benefit from those drugs.

TUSC2 and the Immune Response. In addition to its pro-apoptotic cytotoxicity and tyrosine kinase inhibitory activity, TUSC2 enhances the immune response to cancer. Data from preclinical studies at MD Anderson has shown a therapeutic benefit from the combination of TUSC2 and anti-PD-1 antibody and a key role for TUSC2 in regulating immune cell subpopulations including cytokines, natural killer ("NK") cells, and T lymphocytes. In addition, TUSC2 has been found to down-regulate PD-L1 on the surface of cancer cells. As a result, lymphocytes expressing the PD-1 receptor are more likely to recognize the cancer cell as an altered cell that should be destroyed. In addition, by inducing tumor cell apoptosis TUSC2 increases antigen release and presentation, thus promoting an enhanced antitumor response in the presence of other immune regulators.

NK cells, an important part of the innate immune system, have developed several mechanisms to distinguish healthy cells from target cells. These mechanisms allow NK cells to kill cells that are deemed dangerous to the host, including cancer cells. However, one of the consequences of malignant transformation is the ability of the cancer cell to evade the immune system. Cancer cells do so via the up-regulation and interplay of receptors, including checkpoint inhibitors such as PD-1 and PD-L1.

As shown in the illustration below, TUSC2 has been found to stimulate the release of interleukin-15, or IL-15, resulting in up-regulation of mature NK cells that circulate and target cancer cells.

Modulation by TUSC2 of the Immune Response to Cancer

ONCOPREX® Nanoparticle Delivery System

Our oncology platform consists of anti-cancer genes expressing DNA plasmids contained in non-viral lipid nanoparticles delivered intravenously. REQORSA utilizes the ONCOPREX® Nanoparticle Delivery System to encapsulate the TUSC2 gene in positively charged nanoparticles that bind to negatively charged cancer cells, and then enter the cancer cell through selective endocytosis, a process by which cells take in substances from outside the cell by engulfing them in a vesicle. The nanoparticles in our system differ significantly from liposomes historically used for drug delivery in that they are true particles encapsulating the therapeutic payload within a bilamellar lipid coat.

Operation of the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System

The particle size is small enough to allow REQORSA to cross tight barriers in the lung, but large enough to avoid accumulation or clearance in the liver, spleen, and kidney. The cationic (positive) charge of the nanoparticles target cancer cells. A Phase 1 clinical trial showed that intravenous REQORSA therapy selectively and preferentially targeted tumor cells, resulting in anticancer activity. The nanoparticles are non-immunogenic, allowing repetitive therapeutic dosing and providing extended half-life in the circulation.

The ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System is a non-viral delivery system. Many gene therapies rely on viral based delivery systems. The benefit of the viral system is that viruses are skilled at penetrating cells. However, viruses can also affect more than one type of cell and it is possible that the virus may infect cells other than the targeted cells containing mutated genes. If this happens, healthy cells may be damaged causing other illness or diseases, such as cancer. Once REQORSA is taken up into a cancer cell, the TUSC2 gene is expressed and TUSC2 protein is capable of restoring certain defective functions in the cancer cell. REQORSA has been designed using the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System to deliver the functioning TUSC2 gene to cancer cells while minimizing their uptake by normal tissue. Studies in mice showed that the uptake of TUSC2 in tumor cells after REQORSA treatment was 10 to 33 times the uptake in normal cells, and studies in three NSCLC patients showed a major increase in TUSC2 expression in tumor tissue one day after REQORSA administration. REQORSA is also delivered systemically as opposed to many other gene therapies.

REQORSA Origins, Development Rationale, and Strategy

TUSC2 was discovered through a lung cancer research consortium from MD Anderson and The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center along with the National Cancer Institute. The TUSC2 discovery teams included Jack A. Roth, MD, FACS, chairman of our Scientific Advisory Board.

Our goal is to utilize our novel gene therapy platform to provide more effective treatments to large patient populations suffering from devastating illness.

REQORSA, our lead product candidate, initially is being developed as a potential treatment for NSCLC. Clinical and preclinical data indicate that REQORSA, when combined with EGFR TKIs such as Tagrisso, Tarceva and Iressa, provides a synergistic effect that could also benefit the larger population of NSCLC patients who are EGFR negative (which is an indicator that they are not expected to benefit from EGFR TKI drugs alone). Further, our data shows that REQORSA may re-sensitize EGFR positive patients who become resistant to, and therefore no longer benefit from, EGFR TKIs alone. Thus, REQORSA may both significantly expand the benefit of EGFR TKIs to the majority of patients who do not have EGFR activating mutations, and also extend the usefulness and benefit of EGFR TKIs for the population of NSCLC patients who are EGFR positive, but whose tumors progress on EGFR TKIs. Preclinical and clinical data support our belief that REQORSA may provide medical benefit in several subpopulations of NSCLC patients for which there is an unmet medical need, and also served as the basis for the receipt from the FDA in January 2020 of our first Fast Track Designation. In granting this Fast Track Designation, the FDA found that REQORSA has the potential to provide a benefit over existing therapies for patients whose tumors progress on Tagrisso. This FDA Fast Track Designation is for use of the combination of REQORSA with Tagrisso for the treatment of NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations whose tumors progressed after treatment with Tagrisso.

Pre-clinical data also have shown that REQORSA enhances the immune response to cancer. Data from preclinical studies at MD Anderson have shown a therapeutic benefit from the combination of TUSC2 and anti-PD-1 antibody and a key role for TUSC2 in regulating immune cell subpopulations including cytokines, NK cells, and T lymphocytes. In addition, TUSC2 has been found to down-regulate PD-L1 on the surface of cancer cells. These data, along with our previous pre-clinical and clinical data, provided the basis for the receipt from the FDA in December 2021 of our second Fast Track Designation. In granting this Fast Track Designation, the FDA found that REQORSA has the potential to provide a benefit over existing therapies for patients whose tumors progress on Keytruda. This FDA Fast Track Designation is for use of the combination of REQORSA with Keytruda for the treatment of NSCLC patients whose tumors progressed after treatment with Keytruda.

Our study in SCLC builds on the pre-clinical data showing that REQORSA enhances the immune response to cancer, and that the combination of REQORSA and immune checkpoint inhibitors demonstrates a therapeutic benefit over immune checkpoint inhibitors alone. Immune checkpoint inhibitors, such as Tecentriq, have recently been approved for use in ES-SCLC. Tecentriq, for instance, is used in combination with the chemotherapy drugs carboplatin and etoposide for 4 cycles of therapy, and then Tecentriq is administered alone as maintenance therapy until disease progression. Unfortunately, this is a relatively short time since the median PFS after starting maintenance therapy is 2.6 months. Based on the immunologic activity of Reqorsa, we plan to combine REQORSA with Tecentriq and use this combination as maintenance therapy with the goal of prolonging PFS and survival of ES-SCLC patients.

Pre-clinical studies by MD Anderson researchers have included combining REQORSA with:

The manufacturers of the marketed drugs were not involved in any of our clinical or preclinical studies. In clinical studies involving marketed drugs, the drugs were administered concurrently with REQORSA without being modified in any way, and the antibodies used in our preclinical studies that did not use the marketed drugs were the non-humanized equivalent to marketed drugs.

Data from these clinical and preclinical studies indicates that combining REQORSA with these other therapies yields results more favorable than either these therapies or REQORSA alone, with minimal side effects relative to other lung cancer drugs, thereby potentially making REQORSA a therapy complementary to these cancer treatments.

Acclaim-1

As described above, in January 2020, we received Fast Track Designation from the FDA for use of REQORSA in combination with TKI Tagrisso for the treatment of NSCLC patients with EGFR mutations whose tumors progressed after treatment with Tagrisso.

We currently are enrolling patients in our Acclaim-1 trial, a Phase 1/2 open-label, dose-escalation and clinical response study of REQORSA in combination with Tagrisso in patients with advanced, EGFR-mutant, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer who have progressed after treatment with Tagrisso. We anticipate enrolling patients at approximately 15-20 clinical sites and estimate that the dose escalation portion of the Acclaim-1 trial will enroll between 12 and 18 patients, the dose expansion portion of Acclaim-1 will enroll approximately 66 patients in 2 cohorts, and the randomized Phase 2 portion will enroll approximately 74 patients. Patients enrolled in the randomized Phase 2 portion of the study will be randomized 1:1 to either REQORSA and Tagrisso combination therapy or to Tagrisso monotherapy. Prior to entry into the trial, patients may receive local therapy such as radiation therapy, to progressing lesions. Patients will be treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity is experienced. Patients must have histologically confirmed unresectable stage III or IV EGFR-positive NSCLC (any histology) with:

● radiological progression on Tagrisso (third generation EGFR-TKI); and

● an ECOG performance status of 0 to 1.

The primary endpoint of the dose escalation portion is dose limiting toxicity ("DLT"), defined as ≥Grade 3 prolonged non-hematological or ≥Grade 4 prolonged hematological toxicity occurring during the first cycle of therapy and considered to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to REQORSA and Tagrisso combination therapy. The primary endpoint of the expansion portion and of the Phase 2 randomized portion of the trial is progression-free survival which is defined as time from randomization to disease progression) or death. Patients will be followed for up to 12 months following administration of their last dose of Tagrisso. The expansion portion will be designated a Phase 2 trial in an upcoming protocol amendment.

In February 2022, we dosed the first patient in the Acclaim-1 trial. In August 2022, the Acclaim-1 SRC approved escalating the dose from 0.06 mg/kg in the first cohort of patients to 0.09 mg/kg in the second cohort of patients and in December 2022, the SRC approved escalating the dose from 0.09 mg/kg in the second cohort to 0.12 mg/kg in the third and final cohort. We are thus enrolling and treating patients at the 0.12 mg/kg dose level in the dose escalation portion of the study. There have been no DLTs in the 0.06 or 0.09 mg/kg dose groups. After completion of enrollment and cycle one of treatment for the remaining untreated patients, the Acclaim-1 SRC will meet and establish the MTD or RP2D. We will then proceed into the dose expansion portion of the study which is a Phase 2 study. The principal advantage of adding the dose expansion portion to the study is to gain early evidence of drug effectiveness in defined distinct patient populations represented by the two expansion cohorts, in order to increase the likelihood of a successful randomized Phase 2 trial. We expect enrollment in the dose escalation portion of the Acclaim-1 trial will be completed in the next several days following the filing of this Annual Report. We expect to present dose escalation data at an upcoming scientific meeting and/or release data in the second quarter of 2023.

Acclaim-2

In December 2021, we received Fast Track Designation from the FDA for use of REQORSA in combination with the checkpoint inhibitor Keytruda for the treatment of advanced NSCLC patients whose tumors progressed after treatment with Keytruda.

In 2019, preclinical data were presented by MD Anderson collaborators relating to the combination of TUSC2, the active agent in REQORSA, with Keytruda showing that TUSC2 combined with the checkpoint blockade mechanism of action of Keytruda was more effective than Keytruda alone in increasing the survival of mice with a human immune system (humanized mice) that had metastatic lung cancer. MD Anderson also presented preclinical data in 2019 for the combination of TUSC2, Keytruda and chemotherapy for the treatment of some of the most resistant metastatic lung cancers. This study found that the addition of TUSC2 demonstrates synergy with Keytruda and with Keytruda combined with chemotherapy, and thus, may improve on the first-line standard of care for lung cancer. In May 2020, we entered into a worldwide, exclusive license agreement with The Board of Regents of the University of Texas System on behalf of MD Anderson for the use of TUSC2 in combination with immunotherapies, including Keytruda, and also for the use of TUSC2 in a three-drug combination of TUSC2, immunotherapy and chemotherapy. For a further description and discussion of the exclusive license agreement with MD Anderson, please see the "Business - Licenses and Research Collaborations" section below in this Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report.

The Acclaim-2 trial is a Phase 1/2 open-label, dose-escalation and clinical response study of REQORSA in combination with Keytruda in patients with advanced, metastatic non-small-cell lung cancer who have progressed after treatment with Keytruda. We expect to enroll patients at approximately 10-15 clinical sites and estimate that the dose escalation portion of the Acclaim-2 trial will enroll up to 18 patients, the dose expansion portion will enroll 36 patients, and the Phase 2 randomized portion will enroll approximately 126 patients. Patients enrolled in the Phase 2 randomized portion of the study will be randomized 2:1 to either REQORSA and Keytruda combination therapy or to chemotherapy (docetaxel with or without ramucirumab). Patients will be treated until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity is experienced. Patients must have histologically confirmed unresectable stage III or IV NSCLC (any histology) with:

● radiological progression on Keytruda; and

● an ECOG performance status of 0 to 1.

The primary endpoint of the dose escalation portion is DLT, defined as ≥Grade 3 prolonged non-hematological or ≥Grade 4 prolonged hematological toxicity occurring during the first cycle of therapy and considered to be possibly, probably, or definitely related to REQORSA and Keytruda combination therapy. The primary endpoint of the dose expansion portion and the Phase 2 randomized portion of the trial is progression-free survival which is defined as time from randomization to disease progression or death. Patients will be followed for survival. The dose expansion portion is considered a Phase 2 study.

In April 2022, we dosed the first patient in the Acclaim-2 trial at the 0.06 mg/kg dose level and, subject to Acclaim-2 SRC approval, will treat the two successive cohorts of patients at the 0.09 mg/kg and 0.12 mg/kg dose levels. In March 2023, we amended the Acclaim-2 protocol to include additional treatments in the control group with the goal of accelerating enrollment in the study by making the trial more attractive to a wider variety of investigators. We expect enrollment in the dose escalation portion of the Acclaim-2 trial will be completed by the end of 2023. We will then evaluate patients in the dose expansion portion of the study at the MTD or RP2D to expand the safety and efficacy profile at that dose in order to better evaluate efficacy and to increase the likelihood of a successful randomized Phase 2 trial, which will follow the dose expansion portion.

Acclaim-3

In November 2022, we filed with the FDA our protocol for our Phase 1/2 Acclaim-3 clinical trial using a combination of REQORSA and Genentech, Inc.’s Tecentriq as maintenance therapy in patients with ES-SCLC who did not develop tumor progression after receiving Tecentriq and chemotherapy as initial standard treatment. Patients in the study will be enrolled after receiving initial treatment with 3-4 cycles of carboplatin, etoposide, and Tecentriq, and achieving complete response, partial response or stable disease. They will then receive treatment with REQORSA and Tecentriq as maintenance therapy every 21 days until disease progression. We expect to dose the first patient in Acclaim-3 by the end of the third quarter of 2023. We anticipate enrolling patients at approximately 10 U.S. clinical sites and estimate that the Phase 1 escalation portion of the Acclaim-3 trial will enroll up to 12 patients, and the Phase 2 portion will enroll approximately 50 patients. Patients will be treated with REQORSA and Tecentriq until disease progression or unacceptable toxicity is experienced. The primary endpoint of the Phase 1 escalation portion is to determine the MTD or RP2D and the Phase 2 is to determine the 18-week progression-free survival rate from the time of the start of maintenance therapy with REQORSA and Tecentriq in patients with ES-SCLC. Patients will also be followed for survival.

ONC-001: REQORSA® Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial (completed)

In 2012, MD Anderson researchers completed a Phase 1 clinical trial of REQORSA as a monotherapy (the “Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial”) in patients with advanced NSCLC with disease progression at study entry. The primary objective of the REQORSA Monotherapy Trial was to assess the toxicity of REQORSA administered intravenously and to determine the MTD and RP2D of REQORSA alone. Secondary objectives were to assess the expression of TUSC2 following intravenous delivery of REQORSA in tumor biopsies and also to assess the anticancer activity of REQORSA. This trial showed that REQORSA was well tolerated and established the MTD and the therapeutic dosage for REQORSA at 0.06 mg/kg administered every 21 days. This MTD was established based on the occurrence of an asymptomatic, Grade 3 laboratory abnormality in 2 patients. Although this trial was not designed to show changes in outcomes, a halt in cancer growth was observed in a number of patients, and tumor regressions occurred in primary lung tumors and metastatic cancers in the liver, pancreas, and lymph nodes. In addition, pre- and post-treatment patient biopsies demonstrated that intravenous REQORSA selectively and preferentially targeted patients’ cancer cells and suggested that clinical anti-cancer activity was mediated by TUSC2.

In the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial, REQORSA was injected intravenously in stage IV (metastatic) lung cancer patients who had received traditional platinum combination chemotherapy but still showed tumor progression at the time of entry into the study. Thirty-one subjects were treated at six dose levels. Seventy percent of subjects had received two or more prior chemotherapy regimens. The only serious adverse events were grade 3 fever (experienced by three patients) and grade 3 hypotension (experienced by 1 patient). The only dose-limiting toxicities were two episodes of transient grade 3 hypophosphatemia (abnormally low levels of phosphate in the blood) resulting in an MTD of 0.06 mg/kg. Five patients, or 22% of the 23 evaluable patients, achieved disease control for periods ranging from 2.6 months to 10.8 months. The median disease control period for these patients was 5.0 months (95% CI: 2.0-7.6). Median survival for all subjects in the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial was 8.3 months (95% CI 6.0-10.5 months) and mean survival time was 13.2 months (95%CI 8.9-7.5 months) with a range of two to 23+ months.

Two subjects had reductions in primary tumor size of 14% and 26%. One subject with stable disease, a 54-year-old female with a large cell neuroendocrine carcinoma who received 12 cycles of REQORSA therapy, had evidence of a durable metabolic response, which is a lasting reduction of metabolic activity in the tumor, as shown by positron emission tomography ("PET") imaging. The response was documented with PET scans performed after the second, fourth and sixth doses, all showing markedly decreased metabolic activity in the tumor with no changes in size or number of metastases by computed tomography ("CT") imaging. The illustration below is of the PET scan of this subject performed at baseline (Illustration A) and after the fourth dose (Illustration B). This subject had received six prior chemotherapy regimens. Prior to entry in the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial, two hepatic metastases were progressing on gemcitabine. The subject also had a metastasis in the head of the pancreas and a peripancreatic lymph node, shown by the arrows in the illustration below. Illustration A shows the pretreatment PET scan. Illustration B shows the post treatment PET scan performed 20 days following the fourth dose of REQORSA. All scans were performed within a 60 to 90 minute window after injection.

Metabolic Tumor Response in a Metastatic Lung Cancer Subject

This subject survived after subsequent therapy more than seven years after the final treatment with REQORSA, to our knowledge, without evidence of cancer progression in the responding sites.

ONC-002: Phase 1/2 - Trial Combining REQORSA with Tarceva (Phase 1 portion completed; Phase 2 portion no longer enrolling in favor of conducting Acclaim-1)

Phase 1 Portion: The Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial showed that REQORSA is well tolerated, that high levels of TUSC2 expression are detected in the tumor post-treatment, and that there was evidence of tumor growth suppression. Based on the results from the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial and substantial preclinical evidence that REQORSA is complementary with EGFR TKIs, we began a Phase 1/2 trial (the “Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial”) at MD Anderson combining REQORSA with Tarceva in patients with Stage IV (metastatic) or recurrent NSCLC that is not potentially curable by radiotherapy or surgery. Patients were enrolled whether or not they had an activating EGFR mutation. Enrollment in the Phase 1 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial commenced in 2014 at MD Anderson with Dr. Charles Lu as the Principal Investigator.

In the Phase 1 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial, 18 subjects were treated with the following dose levels:

Dose Level Drug Doses

1 Tarceva (100 mg/day) + REQORSA (0.045 mg/kg)

2 Tarceva (100 mg/day) + REQORSA (0.060 mg/kg)

3 Tarceva (150 mg/day) + REQORSA (0.045 mg/kg)

4 Tarceva (150 mg/day) + REQORSA (0.060 mg/kg)

As in the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial, subjects received a pre-treatment regimen of oral and intravenous dexamethasone and diphenhydramine to prevent infusion reaction symptoms such as fever, along with an infusion of REQORSA every three weeks. Subjects received oral Tarceva daily during each three-week cycle during the treatment period.

The Phase 1 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial was also a dose escalation study with the primary purpose of determining the MTD. DLT were defined as grade 3, 4, or 5 events during the first cycle of treatment that were considered to be treatment related. At dose level 1, one subject had grade 3 adverse events of fatigue, muscle weakness, and hyponatremia (low sodium level) considered to be related to the study treatment (Tarceva). Therefore, three additional subjects were treated at this dose level (six subjects total), none of whom suffered a DLT. At dose level 2, there were no DLTs. At dose level 3, one subject had a grade 3 rash considered to be related to the study treatment (Tarceva); therefore, an additional three subjects were treated at this dose level (six subjects total). No additional subjects had a DLT. At dose level 4, there were no DLTs; thus, dose level 4, as the highest dose evaluated, was determined to be the dose to be used in the Phase 2 portion of the study.

Since the eligibility criteria, drug administration details (other than dose) and evaluation details were identical for the Phase 1 portion and the Phase 2 portion, the three subjects in the Phase 1 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial who were treated at the Phase 2 dose (0.06 mg/kg) were included in the analysis of the Phase 2 portion of the study.

Phase 2 Portion: The Phase 2 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial was designed to include subjects treated with the combination of REQORSA and Tarceva at the Phase 2 dose with the primary goal of measuring the response rate, and secondary endpoints of stable disease, time to progression and overall survival. The response rate for cancer therapies was defined as Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR); disease control rate was defined as Complete Response (CR) + Partial Response (PR) + Stable Disease (SD) > 8 weeks.

Enrollment criteria for the Phase 2 portion were identical to those in the first phase. Subjects received three-week cycles of REQORSA in combination with Tarceva until the occurrence of progressive disease (PD), unacceptable toxicity, withdrawal of consent, or study treatment discontinuation for other reasons, whichever occurred first.

Of the 39 patients planned for the Phase 2 portion of the trial, 10 were enrolled (three of whom were also subjects of the Phase 1 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial). None of the 10 subjects treated in the Phase 2 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial suffered a DLT. Interim results from the Phase 2 portion for the 10 patients show that:

● Three patients had tumor regression; and

● Disease control rate was 70%.

The patient with the CR, a 58-year-old female, upon enrollment in the study had metastatic NSCLC following 6 cycles of pemetrexed and carboplatin and after two cycles of maintenance pemetrexed had cancer progression. The patient’s tumor had EGFR exon 18 and 20 missense mutations, which are not sensitive to Tarceva alone. This patient had disappearance of lung lymph node metastases.

We are no longer enrolling the Phase 2 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial in favor of conducting the Acclaim-1 trial since Tagrisso has been shown to be more effective than Tarceva as initial therapy for patients with NSCLC with EGFR mutations.

The response rate and disease control rate observed in the Phase 2 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial substantially exceeds the response rate of 7% (with no CRs) and disease control rate of 58% reported for a clinical trial of the EGFR TKI afatinib (marketed as Gilotrif® by Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc.) in a study referred to as the LUX-Lung 1 clinical trial. The LUX-Lung 1 clinical trial was a randomized, double blinded Phase 2b/3 clinical trial treating subjects with Stage IIIB or IV adenocarcinoma, a type of NSCLC. Patients in that trial had received one or two previous chemotherapy regimens and had disease progression after at least 12 weeks of treatment with EGFR inhibitors erlotinib or gefitinib. A total of 585 patients were enrolled in that Phase 2b/3 clinical trial, whose primary endpoint was overall survival and whose secondary endpoints included progression-free survival and RECIST response. The Phase 2 portion of our Phase 1/2 trial was not blinded and was designed to treat NSCLC subjects regardless of EGFR status.

The following table provides data from the Phase 2 portion of the Phase 1/2 Combination Tarceva Trial for subjects with and without EGFR mutations. Note that two patients with disease progression on Tarceva received 10 and 12 cycles of Tarceva, respectively, before disease progression and entry into the trial. With the combination of REQORSA and Tarceva, both of these patients had stable disease, suggesting that the combination therapy may be an effective treatment for patients whose disease is progressing on Tarceva alone.

Preclinical Studies of REQORSA Supporting Our Conduct of Acclaim-1

REQORSA and Tyrosine Kinases. Investigators at MD Anderson conducted preclinical research showing that REQORSA alone blocked the activation of the c-Abl tyrosine kinase. A number of other studies at MD Anderson have shown the complementary effects of REQORSA combined with a variety of targeted kinase inhibitory agents, both marketed and in various stages of clinical development, including Tarceva, Iressa, and Tagrisso.

REQORSA and TUSC2 deficient and Tarceva or Iressa resistant cell lines. MD Anderson researchers also tested REQORSA in TUSC2-deficient and Tarceva- or Iressa-resistant NSCLC cell lines. Treatment of the NSCLC EGFR mutation negative cell lines H1299, H322, H358 and H460 cancer cell line showed that the REQORSA combination significantly sensitized (p<0.001) response of the cancer cell lines to both Tarceva or Iressa treatment and synergistically induced apoptosis in vitro. The findings were confirmed in vivo in an H322 orthotopic lung cancer mouse model. These studies included the Kras mutant cell line H460, which is significant because patients with Kras mutant tumors are generally unresponsive to Tarceva or Iressa. Synergistic induction of apoptosis was observed with the combination of REQORSA and concentrations of Tarceva or Iressa similar to steady-state serum concentrations achievable with oral dosing. The combination of REQORSA and either Tarceva or Iressa induced similar levels of tumor cell growth inhibition, apoptosis induction, and inactivation of oncogenic protein kinases.

Data from these and other studies suggest a combination of REQORSA with Iressa or Tarceva can promote synergistic tumor cell killing and overcome drug-induced resistance by simultaneously inactivating the EGFR and the AKT signaling pathways and by inducing apoptosis in resistant cells with nonmutated EGFR. These data suggest that NSCLC patients with an activating EGFR mutation, whose cancer progresses on Tarceva, may potentially benefit from REQORSA with Tarceva combination therapy. These data also suggest that NSCLC patients without an activating EGFR mutation (generally unresponsive to Tarceva) may potentially benefit from REQORSA with Tarceva combination therapy. These data provided strong support for the ONC-002 trial, which combined REQORSA with Tarceva.

REQORSA in Tagrisso resistant cell lines. Osimertinib, the only third-generation EGFR inhibitor, shows robust clinical activity, yet patients inevitably develop secondary resistance. An osimertinib resistant H1975-OsiR isogenic cell line was developed through continuous exposure to osimertinib, and an osimertinib resistant clone was selected which showed 100-fold higher resistance to osimertinib compared with its parental counterpart (H1975-parental). Xenograft tumors from both H1975-parental and H1975-OsiR cells were developed in NSG mice and were treated with osimertinib. H1975-OsiR tumors were significantly less sensitive than its parental counterpart. Synergistic antitumor activity of TUSC2+osimertinib was found in H1975-OsiR tumors where both TUSC2+osimertinib (5mg/kg) and TUSC2+osimertinib (10mg/kg) combinations showed a robust antitumor effect compared with single agent treatment groups. No synergistic effect was observed for H1975-parental tumors. In conclusion, TUSC2 therapy in combination with osimertinib showed synergistic antitumor efficacy in EGFR mutant osimertinib resistant NSCLC tumors. These data provide a strong biologic rationale for the Acclaim-1 clinical trial.

Preclinical Studies of TUSC2 in the Immune Response to Cancer Supporting Our Conduct of Acclaim-2

Preclinical studies indicate that REQORSA is selectively taken up by tumor cells with a 10 to 33 fold differential favoring uptake by tumor cells, thus imparting a passive targeting property without the need to attach targeting ligands. REQORSA targeting is partly due to the attraction of opposite charges (REQORSA has a positive charge, normal cells no charge, and most cancer cells have a negative charge), and partly due to enhanced endocytosis by tumor cells.

In experimental mouse xenograft models, the ONCOPREX delivery system was shown to efficiently deliver several therapeutic tumor suppressor genes (TP53, FHIT, TUSC2) to disseminated human cancer cells. Metastatic tumor growth was suppressed, and survival prolonged, after systemic administration of the genes via a nanovesicle vector. Human NSCLC A549 cells have no functional TUSC2 gene expression. As shown in Figure 1, intratumoral administration of REQORSA (referred to as FUS1 in Figure 1) to subcutaneous NSCLC A549 tumor xenografts resulted in inhibition of tumor growth.

Figure 1. Effect of REQORSA on the Growth of A549 Subcutaneous Tumor Xenografts in Nude Mice

Moreover, intravenous injections of REQORSA into mice bearing experimental A549 lung metastases resulted in a decrease in the number of metastatic tumor nodules. Lung tumor-bearing animals treated with REQORSA also had a significant increase (P=0.01) in survival time (median survival time: 80 days) compared with 48 to 51 days for control animals.

Analysis of TUSC2 expression by IHC following REQORSA treatment showed distribution of TUSC2 throughout the tumor in a high percentage of the tumor cells. These results demonstrate the potent tumor suppressing activity of the TUSC2 gene, supporting the feasibility of using nanovesicles for systemic plasmid delivery to metastases as well as to primary tumors, and implicating REQORSA as a promising therapeutic agent for primary and disseminated human lung cancer.

REQORSA Synergizes with Pembrolizumab

It was previously shown that the combination of REQORSA and an anti-PD1 antibody inhibited tumor growth synergistically in subcutaneous and metastatic NSCLC KRAS mutant syngeneic mouse models. To determine whether this synergy also applies to the KRAS/LKB1 mutant subtype of human A549 NSCLC cells, humanized mice harboring KRAS/LKB1 mutant A549 lung metastases were treated with REQORSA, pembrolizumab or the combination. These studies were performed with an improved humanized mouse model using fresh human umbilical cord blood derived CD34+ stem cells in NOD mice, which lack immune system cells. The reconstituted humanized mice have a fully competent human immune system with major functional immune populations and were used here to evaluate synergy between REQORSA and pembrolizumab.

The treatment strategy is shown in Figure 2A. REQORSA (referred to as TUSC2 in Figure 2) was administered intravenously every 48 hours for a total of three injections, and pembrolizumab was administered every 3-4 days a total of three times. Bioluminescence imaging was performed to visualize the intensity of tumor burden for mice in different treatment groups both in humanized and non-humanized mice. Both REQORSA and pembrolizumab monotherapies reduced the tumor burden significantly, although pembrolizumab was moderately more effective. Importantly, REQORSA plus pembrolizumab inhibited tumor growth synergistically (*P< 0.05, **P< 0.005, ***, P< 0.0005). (Figure 2B, C). There was no antitumor effect of pembrolizumab and reduced change with REQORSA in non-humanized mice, which was expected since these mice have no immune cells.

To identify the immunological features associated with efficacy of this combination, in depth immune profiling of the tumor microenvironment was performed. An increased number of reconstituted human CD3+ T cells was found in all groups, compared with the untreated control. CD8+ T cells were significantly upregulated by pembrolizumab and its combination with REQORSA (Figure 2D). Levels of activated CD8+ T cells (CD8+CD69+) were also significantly increased in the combination group and were slightly higher than the pembrolizumab group (Figure 2D). There was no effect of pembrolizumab on NK/activated NK cells, whereas REQORSA alone enhanced their levels significantly, indicating REQORSA regulation of NK activation, which is consistent with the previous finding reported in syngeneic mice. The combination had a similar effect as REQORSA monotherapy (Figure 2E). REQORSA, pembrolizumab, and the combination, were all associated with significant decrease of reconstituted human MDSCs (CD33+ve), (Figure 2F). Pembrolizumab and the combination had a profound stimulatory effect on HLA-DR+ dendritic cells (DCs), (Figure 2G). REQORSA alone enhanced HLA-DR+DC levels moderately. Taken together, these results show that the combination of REQORSA and pembrolizumab enhanced the immune response and inhibited tumor growth synergistically (*P< 0.05, **P< 0.005, ***, P< 0.0005).

REQORSA also showed synergistic antitumor activity with nivolumab in the same mouse model, highlighting the role of REQORSA rendering KRAS/LKB1 mutant tumors more sensitive to immune checkpoint blockade. Thus, these data suggest that the synergy of REQORSA with immune checkpoint inhibitors is not limited to pembrolizumab.

Figure 2. Synergistic Antitumor Effect of REQORSA Immunogene Therapy with Pembrolizumab on

KRAS/LKB1 Mutant Lung Metastases in the Humanized Mouse Model

Preclinical Studies of TUSC2 Supporting Our Conduct of Acclaim-3

Transfection of SCLC cells in vitro with TUSC2 showed growth inhibition and a marked suppression of colony formation compared to cells transfected with a control vector These results demonstrate the potential tumor suppression function of TUSC2 in SCLC cells and suggest that TUSC2-mediated gene therapy could be a useful therapeutic strategy for the treatment of SCLC.

In studies in mice using xenografts of human NSCLC cell lines, the combination of quaratusugene ozeplasmid and immune checkpoint inhibitors has been shown to be synergistic. This is a class effect, having been documented with both pembrolizumab and nivolumab. Therefore, it would be expected that the combination of quaratusugene ozeplasmid and atezolizumab would also demonstrate synergy.

Introduction – Diabetes

Diabetes Mellitus. Diabetes mellitus refers to a group of metabolic diseases that affect how the body produces and uses blood sugar (glucose). Glucose is vital to health because it is an important source of energy for the cells that make up the body’s muscles and tissues. It is also the brain's main source of fuel. Chronic diabetes conditions include Type 1 diabetes and Type 2 diabetes, both of which lead to excess sugar in the blood and can cause serious health problems. Left untreated, high blood sugar levels can damage the eyes, kidneys, nerves, and the heart, and can also lead to coma and death.

Epidemiology of Diabetes. According to the U.S. Center for Disease Control as of 2022, 37.3 million Americans, or approximately 11.3% of the population, have diabetes. It is also believed that more than 96 million Americans aged 18 years or older have prediabetes, which represents approximately 38% of the U.S. adult population. In 2021, approximately 537 million adults (20-79 years) worldwide were living with diabetes, and the total number of people living with diabetes is projected to rise to 643 million by 2030 and 783 million by 2045. Also in 2021, diabetes caused more than 6.7 million deaths globally.

The Role of Alpha Cells and Beta Cells. The two most abundant endocrine cell types in the pancreas, the beta and the alpha cells, are essential for the maintenance of blood glucose homeostasis whereby levels of glucose are maintained by the body within a narrow range. While the beta cell produces insulin, the only blood glucose-lowering hormone of the body, the alpha cell releases glucagon, which elevates blood glucose. While the release products of the beta cell inhibit alpha cell function, the alpha cell releases factors that are stimulatory for beta cell function and increase glucose-stimulated insulin secretion.

In people with Type 1 diabetes, however, beta cells are destroyed by the immune system and no longer secrete insulin, leading to an absolute deficit of insulin. Type 2 diabetes is due to "insulin resistance," an initial resistance of the body's cells to obey the direction from insulin. To overcome this resistance, the beta cells secrete more insulin, and glucose is eventually forced into the cells. Glucose is maintained within normal limits, but at the expense of increased insulin secretion by the beta cells. After many years of such increased secretion, the beta cells become "tired" from working overtime, and the fatigue process begins. This fatigue tends to be progressive, and in time the compensation for insulin resistance disappears. At that point, blood glucose levels start going up.

Current Treatments for Diabetes. Advances in new treatments have helped many people better manage the disease. However, despite patients' best attempts, managing diabetes remains a challenging, daily balancing act because exogenous insulin therapy simply cannot ideally mimic the body’s biological function.

Type 1 diabetes patients are treated with insulin, with most of the progress in therapy relating to enhanced delivery of the drug and improved methods for measuring blood glucose levels. A variety of drug release technologies have allowed for rapid-acting, intermediate-acting and long-acting insulin injections that provide drug anywhere from one to 24 hours. In addition, improvements in needles, continuous delivery ports, and inhalation technologies all have helped patients better manage their disease and may impact quality of life, but none of these advances are disease modifying.

Type 2 diabetes patients are advised to use diet and exercise to manage their condition. When these lifestyle changes alone do not control the disease, Type 2 diabetes patients may be prescribed a variety of medications that help alter how the body manages blood sugar levels. For example, biguanides such as metformin, reduce the amount of glucose produced in the liver. DPP-4 inhibitors, such as Januvia®, Onglyza®, and Tradjenta®, improve blood sugar levels and prevent them from dropping too low. Glucagon-like peptides, such as Byetta®, Trulicity® and Victoza®, change the way the body produces insulin. Drugs in the SGLT2 inhibitor class, such as Farxiga and Invokana, release more glucose into the urine. Finally, insulin injections may be needed if these oral medications, along with diet and exercise, do not lower blood sugar levels enough. These medications, including insulin replacement therapy, while offering improvements for Type 2 diabetes patients, do not affect the underlying cause of the disease.

GPX-002 and GPX-003

As further described in the "Licenses and Research Collaborations" section below, we have exclusively licensed from the University of Pittsburgh multiple technologies relating to the development of a gene therapy product for each of Type 1 and Type 2 diabetes. The same general novel approach is used in each of Type 1 and Type 2 whereby an AAV vector containing the Pdx1 and MafA genes is administered directly into the pancreatic duct. In humans, this can be done with a routine endoscopy procedure. Our diabetes product candidates are currently being evaluated and optimized in preclinical studies at the University of Pittsburgh. GPX-002 is being developed for the treatment of Type 1 diabetes and GPX-003 is being developed for the treatment of Type 2 diabetes. GPX-002 is designed to work by transforming alpha cells in the pancreas into functional beta-like cells, which can produce insulin but are distinct enough from beta cells to evade the body’s immune system and GPX-003 is believed to work by replenishing and rejuvenating the beta cells that make insulin. We expect to finalize our constructs and meet with the FDA before the end of 2023 to obtain their guidance on the toxicology studies that we plan to conduct.

In August 2022, the Company entered into a one-year sponsored research agreement with the University of Pittsburgh for the use of GPX-003 in a NHP model in Type 2 diabetes.

This gene therapy approach has been tested in vivo in mice and NHPs using an earlier construct as described below.

Preclinical Mouse Studies

In studies in non-obese diabetic (“NOD”) mice and in mice treated to destroy insulin producing beta cells, both of which are models of Type 1 diabetes, our gene therapy approach restored normal blood glucose levels for an extended period of time, and markedly increased the mass of insulin producing beta cells.

The figures below show that starting approximately a week after injection of the engineered AAV construct (labeled AAV8-PM) into the pancreatic duct, the blood glucose level markedly improved in mice in which insulin producing cells had been destroyed by the drug alloxan (ALX). In addition, the mass of beta cells and beta-like cells producing insulin was significantly increased.

Non-obese diabetic mice develop diabetes due to an immune attack that destroys the insulin producing beta cells in the pancreas. The figures below show that starting approximately a week after injection of the engineered AAV construct (labeled AAV8-PM) into the pancreatic duct the blood glucose level markedly improved in NOD mice. In addition, there is a significant increase in the mass of beta cells and beta-like cells that produce insulin. The improvement in glucose level normalization lasted approximately 4 months, which, according to the researchers could potentially translate to decades in humans.

The researchers also carried out an experiment to determine if the same AAV engineered construct could be used to convert human alpha cells to beta-like cells that would produce insulin as shown in the figures below. Human pancreatic islets were treated with streptozotocin (STZ) to destroy beta cells, and then were treated with the AAV engineered construct. They were then transplanted into NOD mice that had been treated with alloxan (ALX), and also modified so they would not reject human cells. The NOD mice that received the AAV engineered construct had significantly lower blood glucose levels and higher mass of beta and beta-like cells that secrete insulin than did control mice. These data suggest that the same AAV engineered construct can convert human alpha cells into insulin secreting beta-like cells.

Preclinical Non-Human Primate Studies

In February 2023, the Company’s research collaborators at the University of Pittsburgh presented preclinical data in a NHP model of Type 1 diabetes highlighting the therapeutic potential of GPX-002 at the 16th International Conference on Advanced Technologies & Treatments for Diabetes (ATTD 2023) in Berlin, Germany. The statistically significant study results showed that after infusion of the AAV engineered construct all eight of the NHPs had:

● Decreased insulin requirements (p<0.001);

● Increased c-peptide levels (p<0.05);

We believe these data in NHPs demonstrate the potential for this gene therapy treatment to eliminate the need for insulin replacement therapy for Type 1 and Type 2 diabetic patients.

Discovery Programs

Oncology

ONCOPREX® Nanoparticle Delivery System as a platform. We believe that the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System may be applicable to delivery of a range of therapeutic and prophylactic plasmid DNA and RNA interference constructs and shows efficacy in cancers beyond lung cancer. We also believe that the manufacturing methods we have developed for REQORSA may be useful for a wide array of disease treatments. Clinical data from the use of REQORSA has shown that the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System is well tolerated in humans and can be delivered at high therapeutic doses.

Rights to other Tumor Suppressor Genes. We have licensed rights to the tumor suppressor gene, TUSC2, which is located in a sub-region of human Chromosome 3 known as 3p21.3, on which multiple tumor suppressor genes are located, including for example, 101F6, NPRL2, CACNA2D2, PL6, BLU, RASSF1, HYAL 1 and HYAL2. Using a number of techniques, MD Anderson researchers and their collaborators have identified these genes as potentially having cancer-fighting characteristics. MD Anderson researchers have subsequently conducted a number of preclinical studies on certain of these genes, particularly 101F6 and NPRL2, as well as TUSC2, both alone and in combination with other compounds, in order to assess their actual effects on lung cancer. Under past and current sponsored research agreements with MD Anderson, we support continuing research into the cancer-fighting properties of these and other genes in the 3p21.3 sub-region.

Researchers at MD Anderson have collaborated with other researchers to identify other genes, such as those in the 3p21.3 chromosomal region, which may act as tumor suppressors or have other cancer fighting functions. We hold rights to certain of these genes under license agreements with MD Anderson. Data from preclinical studies performed by MD Anderson researchers and others suggest that TUSC2, the active agent in REQORSA, could be effective against other types of cancer, including glioblastoma, head and neck, breast (including triple-negative breast cancer), renal cell (kidney), thyroid, and soft tissue sarcoma, as well as NSCLC and SCLC. Therefore, the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System may allow delivery of a number of cancer fighting genes, alone or in combination with other cancer therapies, to combat multiple types of cancer.

In addition, we have identified internally other tumor suppressor genes on which we have filed for intellectual property protection.

Diabetes

In November 2022, we exclusively licensed from the University of Pittsburgh technology that transforms macrophages enabling them to reduce autoimmune activity in Type 1 diabetes and could be complementary to the Company’s existing diabetes technology. The technology modulates autoimmunity in Type 1 diabetes using gene therapy.

Process Development and Manufacturing

We have made substantial investment in manufacturing for our product candidates with the goal of mitigating the risks associated with the complex manufacturing of gene therapies. While we continue to use third-party contract development and manufacturing organizations ("CDMOs") in the manufacture of our product candidates, we believe we have a competitive advantage in our field based on core competencies we have developed that we are leveraging in the manufacture of our product candidates. These core competencies include:

● Extensive and diverse internal expertise;

● Risk assessment and remediation for FDA submissions;

● Novel and proprietary manufacturing processes;

● Management of supply chain for business continuity.

In our oncology program, we are focused on preparing for commercial readiness for REQORSA. To date we have developed a robust manufacturing process for REQORSA through years of process development activities that we continue to improve with the dramatic development and expansion of advanced technologies in the nascent gene therapy sector. REQORSA is an immunogene therapy with two main components. The active agent in REQORSA is a DNA plasmid encoding the TUSC2 protein. The plasmid is encapsulated by non-viral DOTAP cholesterol lipid nanoparticles. This system of encapsulating DNA plasmid in non-viral lipid nanoparticles is referred to by us as our ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System. Each of these two components currently is manufactured by separate CDMOs and then transported to another CDMO for final drug formulation. REQORSA utilizes the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System, a non-viral platform allowing for systemic delivery. REQORSA has been shown to be scalable at cGMP and can be stored for approximately 12 to 18 months for later use. Successful tech transfer of REQORSA from MD Anderson, where it was developed and previously manufactured, to CDMOs has been achieved as well as scale-up of our clinical grade manufacturing production in accordance with cGMP. The clinical grade material is being used to supply our Acclaim-1 and Acclaim-2 clinical trials and will be used to supply our Acclaim-3 clinical trials.

For our diabetes program, which is an earlier stage program than our oncology program, we are working with our academic collaborators at University of Pittsburgh to transfer the technologies associated with the manufacture of our GPX-002 and GPX-003 constructs to an appropriate integrated network of CDMOs and other vendors. This also involves the investigation of novel advanced technologies to incorporate in these processes. GPX-002 and GPX-003 involve the delivery of the Pdx1 and MafA genes into the pancreas via the pancreatic duct utilizing an AAV vector.

We manage our manufacturing arrangements with our CDMOs and other vendors through various agreements.

Intellectual Property

Patents and other proprietary rights such as trademarks and trade secrets are critical to our business and to our ability to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates. Our goal is to obtain, maintain, enhance and enforce patent protection for our products, formulations, processes, methods and other proprietary technologies, preserve our trade secrets, and operate without infringing on the proprietary rights of other parties, both in the U.S. and in other countries. Our policy is to actively seek the broadest intellectual property protection possible for our product candidates, proprietary information, and proprietary technology through a combination of contractual arrangements, patents, trade secrets, trademarks, copyrights and regulatory exclusivity both in the U.S. and elsewhere in the world. Patents provide a period of exclusivity intended to make it more difficult for competitors to make, use or sell competing technologies. We additionally rely on regulatory protection afforded through data exclusivity, market exclusivity, orphan drug designation and/or patent term extensions, where available. We have developed and/or in-licensed numerous patents and pending patent applications that relate to compositions-of-matter, methods-of-use and other technologies and possess substantial know-how and trade secrets relating to the development of gene therapy technologies.

As further described in the “Licenses and Research Collaborations” section below, we hold a worldwide, exclusive license from MD Anderson to patents covering the therapeutic use of TUSC2 and other genes that have been shown to have cancer fighting properties, including 14 issued patents and 13 pending patent applications for technologies developed at MD Anderson and The University of Texas Southwestern Medical Center. These patents comprise various therapeutic, diagnostic, technical and processing claims relating to REQORSA and our ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System. We expect these patents and patent applications, if issued, to expire from 2024 to 2038. The rights we have obtained pursuant to our license agreement with MD Anderson are made subject to the rights of the U.S. government to the extent that the technology covered by the licensed intellectual property was developed under a funding agreement between MD Anderson and the U.S. government. As further described in the “Licenses and Research Collaborations” section below, we also hold worldwide, exclusive licenses to an issued patent and 7 pending patent applications for diabetes technologies developed at the University of Pittsburgh. We expect these patents and patent applications, if issued, to expire from 2035 to 2043. We also are prosecuting four patent applications relating to various oncology targets in our discovery program. In addition, for certain of our product candidates we also expect to have further exclusivity in the form of data and marketing exclusivity under pharmaceutical regulatory laws, including for example, potentially up to 12 years of exclusivity from the date of first BLA approval of our product candidates. For a further description and discussion of these laws, exclusivities and their regulatory background, please see the “Business – Government Regulation” section below in this Part I, Item 1 of this Annual Report.

We also have received trademark registrations for the trademarks GENPREX, REQORSA, and ONCOPREX. For a discussion of the challenges we face in obtaining or maintaining patent, trademark and/or trade secret protection, please see the risk factors under the heading “Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property” in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report.

Licenses and Research Collaborations

Agreements with MD Anderson

Our ONCOPREX and REQORSA technologies are exclusively licensed pursuant to a Patent and Technology License Agreement dated July 20, 1994, with MD Anderson, as amended on September 1, 1996, August 11, 1997, July 31, 1994 and October 4, 2001 (collectively, the "1994 MD Anderson License Agreement"), between MD Anderson and Introgen Therapeutics, Inc. (f/k/a Intron Therapeutics, Inc.) (“Introgen”).

Pursuant to the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement, we have rights to patents covering use of various genes, including the TUSC2 gene, for treatment of cancer, as well as know-how and related intellectual property.

The exclusive licenses under the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement will continue until the expiration of all patents covered by such agreement. Upon the expiration of the exclusive licenses, we will have a non-exclusive, fully paid-up right and license to use and otherwise exploit the technology rights licensed under the agreement. MD Anderson may terminate the agreement for, among other things, a breach of the agreement by us which remains uncured.

Pursuant to a Technology Sublicense Agreement dated March 7, 2007 (“Sublicense Agreement”), Introgen sublicensed its rights under the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement to Introgen Research Institute, Inc. (“IRI”). IRI is a Texas-based technology company formed by Rodney Varner, our President and Chairman of the Board and IRI's sole officer. IRI is owned by trusts of which Mr. Varner's descendants are the sole beneficiaries.

Pursuant to an Assignment and Collaboration Agreement dated April 13, 2009 (“IRI Collaboration Agreement”) IRI assigned its rights under the Sublicense Agreement to us, and we granted to IRI a non-exclusive, royalty-free license to use and practice the licensed technology for non-commercial research purposes. As consideration for this assignment, we agreed to assume all of IRI’s obligations to MD Anderson under the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement, including ongoing patent related expenses and royalty obligations.

The IRI Collaboration Agreement was amended by an Amended Collaboration and Assignment Agreement dated July 1, 2011 ("2011 IRI Collaboration Agreement"). The 2011 Collaboration Agreement provided that IRI would provide additional licensing opportunities and services to us, in return for monthly payments and our obligation to pay to IRI a royalty of 1% on sales of products licensed to us under the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement. In 2012, IRI’s obligation to provide those opportunities and services, and our obligation to make monthly payments to IRI, were terminated; however, we are required to pay a 1% royalty to IRI upon sales of products licensed to us under the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement which royalty obligation continues for 21 years after the later of the termination of the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement and the termination of the sublicense assigned by IRI to us.

Pursuant to a Technology Sublicense Agreement dated June 1, 2011, we granted to IRI a non-exclusive sublicense, for non-commercial purposes, to the rights under the Sublicense Agreement.

At the time that we entered into the 2011 IRI Collaboration Agreement, Mr. Varner was not an officer or director of Genprex, but he was deemed to be an “affiliate” of the Company due to his beneficial ownership of approximately 39% of our issued and outstanding shares. At the time we acquired the ONCOPREX and REQORSA technologies under the 2009 IRI Collaboration Agreement, they were the subject of the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial. We completed the Phase 1 Monotherapy Trial and did substantial process development, manufacturing and regulatory work necessary to bring the technologies into a Phase 1/2 combination trial.

Pursuant to the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement, the Sublicense Agreement and the 2009 IRI Collaboration Agreement, we are obligated to pay all fees, patent related expenses, royalties, and other amounts that become due with respect to the licensed patents, patent application and other technologies. We are also obligated to pay to MD Anderson royalties of 1.5% of net sales of the licensed products, as well as 1.5% of advance payments received by us (excluding amounts paid to us in reimbursement of development or other costs) from third parties pursuant to sublicense, marketing, distribution or franchise arrangements. Under the 2011 IRI Collaboration Agreement, we are obligated to pay to IRI a royalty of 1.0% of net sales of licensed products and 1.0% of certain other payments received by us. This royalty obligation continues for 21 years after the later of the termination of the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement and the termination of the Sublicense Agreement. We have no other payment obligations to IRI under the 2009 IRI Collaboration Agreement or the 2011 IRI Collaboration Agreement. We were not required to make any up-front payments to MD Anderson or IRI when we entered into the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement, the Sublicense Agreement or the 2009 IRI Collaboration Agreement.

On May 4, 2020 (the “MD Effective Date”), we entered into a Patent and Technology License Agreement with MD Anderson, as amended on March 3, 2021 (collectively, the “2020 License Agreement” and together with the 1994 MD Anderson License Agreement, collectively, the "MD Anderson License Agreements"). Pursuant to the 2020 License Agreement, MD Anderson granted us a worldwide, exclusive, sublicensable, royalty-bearing license to certain licensed intellectual property and technology, including, without limitation, use of chemotherapy in combination with TUSC2 therapy and methods for treating cancer by administration of a TUSC2 in conjunction with EGFR inhibitors or other anti-cancer therapies in patients that are expected to be responsive to TUSC2 therapy (collectively, the “Licensed IP”), to manufacture, use, commercialize, seller, offer for sale and import licensed products related to the treatment of cancer using TUSC2 therapy in combination with certain immunotherapies (the “Licensed Products”). In consideration for our use of the Licensed IP, we are required to make certain payments to MD Anderson, including, without limitation, an upfront license fee as well as a fee paid to amend the agreement, annual maintenance fees ranging from the low five figures to low six figures, milestone payments aggregating up to a maximum of $6,150,000, low single digit royalty payments to low double digits royalty payments with lower net sales being subject to lower royalty payments, and minimum annual royalties after the first sale in a low six figure amount. In addition, we shall be required to reimburse MD Anderson for certain patent expenses. The 2020 License Agreement shall expire on the later to occur of (a) the expiration of all patents issued under the Licensed IP and the cancellation, withdrawal, or express abandonment of all patent applications under the Licensed IP, or (b) 30 years after the MD Effective Date, unless earlier terminated pursuant to the terms thereof.

License Agreement with P53, Inc.

On February 26, 2010, IRI and P53, Inc., which subsequently changed its name to MultiVir Inc., (“P53”) entered into a Technology License Agreement ("P53 License Agreement") pursuant to which IRI granted to P53 a worldwide, exclusive license under certain patents related to the ONCOPREX Nanoparticle Delivery System that we are now using for the delivery of TUSC2, but only for P53’s use in gene therapy products in which the sole active genes are P53 and MDA-7. As a result of the 2009 IRI Collaboration Agreement, we are the licensor under the P53 License Agreement.

The P53 License Agreement authorizes P53 to develop, make and have made, use, offer for sale, sell, import and otherwise distribute the licensed products. As consideration for the P53 License Agreement, P53 agreed to pay IRI one-half of all amounts invoiced by MD Anderson to IRI, up to a maximum of $15,000 to be paid by P53, for patent prosecution expenses incurred prior to the effective date of the P53 License Agreement, as well as two-thirds of IRI’s ongoing patent prosecution expenses, in each case with respect to the licensed patents. Additionally, P53 agreed to pay all amounts that become due to IRI as a result of the P53 License Agreement or the sales, licensing, or other activities of P53 under the P53 License Agreement. Pursuant to the P53 License Agreement, P53 has granted to IRI a fully paid license with respect to improvements made by P53 to the technology licensed to P53 under the P53 License Agreement. The P53 License Agreement remains in effect until the expiration of the last of the patents licensed under the agreement. The last licensed patent under the P53 License Agreement will expire in April 2025. We may terminate the agreement for, among other things, P53’s breach of the agreement or if P53 challenges the validity or enforceability of any of the licensed patents. P53 may terminate the agreement upon 90 days’ written notice.

License Agreement with University of Pittsburgh - Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education

On February 11, 2020, we entered into an exclusive license agreement, as amended on August 8, 2022 and November 3, 2022 (collectively the “2020 UP License Agreement”), with the University of Pittsburgh - Of the Commonwealth System of Higher Education (“University of Pittsburgh” or “UP”) pursuant to which UP granted us a worldwide, exclusive license to certain licensed technology, and a worldwide, non-exclusive license to use certain related know-how, all related to diabetes gene therapy. The 2020 UP License Agreement permits us to make, have made, use and sell certain licensed technology and to practice the patent rights in the field of diabetes therapy. We have agreed to sell the licensed technology to UP upon its request on terms and conditions as such products and/or processes are made available to our most favored customer. As consideration for the 2020 UP License Agreement, we agreed to pay UP an initial license fee, annual maintenance fees, running royalties minimum annual royalties beginning with the first commercial sale of the licensed technology pursuant to such agreement, a share of non-royalty sublicense income, and milestone payments in the aggregate amount of up to $3,975,000, as well as patent prosecution expenses incurred prior to and after the effective date of the 2020 UP License Agreement. The 2020 UP License Agreement shall remain in effect until the later of 20 years after the first commercial sale of the licensed technology or the expiration of the last Valid Claim (as defined in the 2020 UP License Agreement). UP may terminate the agreement if, among other things, (i) we fail to cure a default, (ii) if we fail to achieve the specified milestones within the specified time periods or (iii) our intentional practice of the licensed patent rights or know-how outside the field of diabetes therapy. We may terminate the 2020 UP License Agreement upon six months’ prior written notice to UP and payment of all amounts accrued or due to UP through the effective date of termination.

On November 22, 2022 and December 29, 2022, respectively, we entered into two separate exclusive license agreements with UP on generally the same terms as the 2020 UP License Agreement as described in the preceding paragraph. Both the exclusive license agreement dated November 22, 2022 (the "November 2022 UP License Agreement") and the exclusive license agreement dated December 29, 2022 (the "December 2022 UP License Agreement", and together with the 2020 UP License Agreement and the November 2022 UP License Agreement, collectively, the "UP License Agreements") relate to diabetes gene therapy. The November 2022 UP License Agreement related in particular to the transformation of macrophages enabling them to reduce autoimmunity activity in Type 1 diabetes while the December 2022 UP License Agreement related to gene therapy for Type 2 diabetes using the genes of the Pdx1 and MafA transcription factors.

Grants

Our technology discoveries and research and development programs have been the subject of numerous peer-reviewed publications and have been supported by Small Business Innovation Research ("SBIR") grants and grants from the National Institutes of Health ("NIH"), the United States Department of Treasury, and the State of Texas through its Texas Emerging Technology Fund. The rights we have obtained pursuant to our MD Anderson License Agreements are made subject to the rights of the U.S. government to the extent that the technology covered by the licensed intellectual property was developed under a funding agreement between MD Anderson and the U.S. government. Our collaborators at University of Pittsburgh have also received grants from the NIH in connection with pre-clinical work on GPX-002.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. There is also a strong emphasis on intellectual property and proprietary products. We have domestic and international competitors including major multinational pharmaceutical companies, established biotechnology companies, specialty pharmaceutical and generic drug companies and universities and other research institutions. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

Currently, there are a number of drugs approved and under development for treatment of lung cancer. Treatments competitive with our primary product candidates generally fall into the following categories: chemotherapies such as cisplatin, carboplatin, docetaxel and pemetrexed; targeted therapies such as Tarceva, Iressa, Gilotrif, and Tagrisso, and immunotherapies such as checkpoint inhibitors and CAR and CAR T cells, and oncolytic virus-based technology. Any such competing therapy may be more effective and/or cost-effective than ours.

Type 1 diabetes is an autoimmune disease that permanently destroys beta cells of the pancreatic islet leading to the body no longer having the ability to produce insulin. Type 2 diabetes, also known as adult onset diabetes, is a condition associated with developed resistance to insulin. There are a number of approved treatments and therapies to manage diabetes including insulin, insulin analogs, continuous glucose monitoring, novel approaches to administration such as insulin pens and insulin pumps, and preventative therapeutics. Any of these therapies may be more effective, cost-effective, or considered less invasive than ours.

Many of our competitors have greater financial and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and more experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations than we do. Large pharmaceutical companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining regulatory approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing pharmaceutical products. These companies also have significantly greater research, sales and marketing capabilities and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions. Established pharmaceutical companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. As a result of these factors, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection and/or FDA approval or discovering, developing and commercializing drugs for the cancer indications that we are targeting before we do or may develop drugs that are deemed to be more effective or gain greater market acceptance than ours. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. In addition, many universities and private and public research institutes may become active in our target disease areas. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing on an exclusive basis, technologies and drug products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidates that we are currently developing or that we may develop, which could render our products obsolete or noncompetitive. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize may compete with existing and new therapies that may become available in the future. The availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payers will also significantly affect the pricing and competitiveness of our products. For a further discussion of the challenges we face from competition, please see the "Risk Factors" section in Part I, Item 1A of this Annual Report.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the U.S., at the federal, state and local level, and other countries extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, recordkeeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of products such as those we are developing. The pharmaceutical drug product candidates that we develop must be approved by the FDA before they may be legally marketed.

In the United States, the FDA regulates pharmaceutical products under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”) and implementing regulations and other federal, state and local statutes and regulations. In the case of biologics, the section of the FDCA that governs the approval of drugs via New Drug Applications (“NDAs”) does not apply to the approval of biologics. Rather, biologics, such as gene therapy products, are approved for marketing under provisions of the Public Health Service Act ("PHSA") via a Biologics License Application (“BLA”). However, the application process and requirements for approval of BLAs are very similar to those for NDAs. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, the approval process or after approval, may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement and civil and criminal penalties.

U.S. Biological Products Development Process

The process required by the FDA before a biological product, including our REQORSA, GPX-002, GPX-003, and potential future product candidates, may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

● FDA review and approval, or licensure, of the BLA.

Within the FDA, the Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research (“CBER”) regulates gene therapy products. The FDA has published guidance documents related to, among other things, gene therapy products in general, their preclinical assessment, observing patients involved in gene therapy studies for delayed adverse events, potency testing, and chemistry, manufacturing and control information in gene therapy INDs.

Before testing any product candidate, including a gene therapy product, in humans, the product candidate enters the preclinical testing stage. Preclinical tests, also referred to as nonclinical studies, include laboratory evaluations of product chemistry, toxicity and formulation, as well as animal studies to assess the potential safety and activity of the product candidate. The conduct of certain preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLPs.

The clinical trial sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. Some preclinical testing may continue even after the IND is submitted. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA places the clinical trial on a clinical hold within that 30-day time period. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. The FDA may also impose clinical holds on a product candidate at any time before or during clinical trials due to safety concerns or non-compliance. If the FDA imposes a clinical hold, trials may not recommence without FDA authorization and then only under terms authorized by the FDA.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the product candidate to volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the clinical trial sponsor’s control. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, dosing procedures, patient selection and exclusion criteria, effectiveness criteria to be evaluated, and the parameters to be used to monitor patient safety, including stopping rules that assure a clinical trial will be stopped if certain adverse events occur. Each protocol and any amendments to the protocol must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Clinical trials must be conducted and monitored in accordance with the FDA’s regulations comprising the GCP requirements, including the requirement that all patients provide informed consent. The FDA may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA regulations or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients.

Further, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an independent IRB at or servicing each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted. An IRB is charged with protecting the welfare and rights of clinical trial participants and considers such items as whether the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the form and content of the informed consent, which must be signed by each clinical trial patient or his or her legal representative, and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. Clinical trials involving biological product candidates also must be reviewed by an institutional biosafety committee ("IBC"), a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees basic and clinical research conducted at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment.

Clinical trials to support BLAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap or be combined:

In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug. A single Phase 3 trial may be sufficient in rare instances, including (1) where the study is a large multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible or (2) when in conjunction with other confirmatory evidence. Typically, during the development of oncology therapies, all subjects enrolled in Phase 1 clinical trials are disease-affected patients and, as a result, considerably more information on clinical activity may be collected during such trials than during Phase 1 clinical trials for non-oncology therapies. A single pivotal trial may be sufficient in rare instances to provide substantial evidence of effectiveness (generally subject to the requirement of additional post-approval studies).

In addition, the manufacturer of an investigational biologic in a Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trial for a serious or life-threatening disease is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on evaluating and responding to requests for expanded access to such investigational biologic.

Post-approval clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These clinical trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication, particularly for long-term safety follow-up. The FDA recommends that sponsors observe patients for potential gene therapy-related delayed adverse events with agents such as those we are developing for a period of up to 15 years, including a minimum of five years of annual examinations followed by ten years of annual queries, either in person or by questionnaire, of clinical trial patients.

During all phases of clinical development, regulatory agencies require extensive monitoring and auditing of all clinical activities, clinical data, and clinical trial investigators. Annual progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials must be submitted to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be promptly submitted to the FDA, and the investigators for serious and unexpected adverse events, any findings from other trials, tests in laboratory animals or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human patients, or any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must submit an IND safety report within 15 calendar days after the sponsor determines that the information qualifies for expedited reporting. The sponsor must also notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction within seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA, the sponsor, or its data safety monitoring board may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the investigational product candidate has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients.

Concurrently with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and also develop additional information about the physical characteristics of the components of a product as well as finalize processes for manufacturing the components in commercial quantities in accordance with GMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents with use of biological products, the PHSA, emphasizes the importance of manufacturing control for products whose attributes cannot be precisely defined. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, the sponsor must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the components of a product candidate do not undergo unacceptable deterioration over their shelf life.

U.S. Review and Approval Processes

After the completion of clinical trials of an investigational biologic product, a BLA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of a BLA must be obtained before commercial marketing and distribution of the product may begin in the United States. The BLA must include results of product development, laboratory, and animal studies, human trials, information on the manufacture and composition of the product, proposed labeling and other relevant information. The testing and approval processes require substantial time and effort and there can be no assurance that the FDA will file the BLA and, even if filed, that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, if at all.

Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, as amended (“PDUFA”), each BLA must be accompanied by a significant user fee. The FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. PDUFA also imposes annual program fees on prescription drugs, including biologics. 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. No user fees are assessed on BLAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the application also includes a non-orphan indication.

Within 60 days following submission, the FDA reviews the BLA to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency files it. The FDA may request additional information or may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission.

In this event, the BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application also is subject to an initial filing review before the FDA files it. Once the submission is filed, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review of the BLA. Under PDUFA, FDA has agreed to performance goals to review 90% of original standard BLAs within 10 months of the 60-day filing date and 90% of original priority BLAs within six months of the 60-day filing date, whereupon a review decision is to be made. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority BLAs. The review process and the PDUFA goal date may be extended by three months if the FDA requests or the BLA sponsor otherwise provides additional information or clarification regarding information already provided in the BLA submission. The FDA reviews the BLA to determine, among other things, whether the proposed product is safe and potent, or effective, for its intended use, and has an acceptable purity profile, and whether the product is being manufactured in accordance with GMP to assure and preserve the product’s identity, safety, strength, quality, potency and purity.

The FDA may refer applications for novel products or products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and 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 when making decisions. During the product approval process, the FDA also will determine whether a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (“REMS”) is necessary to assure that the benefits of the biologic outweigh the potential risks of the product to patients. A REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure a product’s safe use (“ETASU”). An ETASU can include, but is not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing the product, dispensing the product only under certain circumstances, special monitoring, and the use of patient-specific registries. If the FDA concludes that a REMS is needed, the sponsor of the BLA must submit a proposed REMS; the FDA will not approve the BLA without a REMS, if required.

Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect the facilities at which the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in substantial compliance with GMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites, to assure that the clinical trials were conducted in compliance with GCP requirements. To assure GMP, GLP and GCP compliance, an applicant must incur significant expenditure of time, money, and effort in the areas of training, record keeping, production, and quality control.

Notwithstanding the submission of relevant data and information, the FDA may ultimately decide that the BLA does not satisfy its regulatory criteria for approval and deny approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently from how we interpret the same data. If the agency decides not to approve the BLA in its present form, the FDA will issue a complete response letter that usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the BLA identified by the FDA. The deficiencies identified may be minor, for example, requiring labeling changes, or major, for example, requiring additional clinical trials. Additionally, the complete response letter may include recommended actions that the applicant might take to place the application in a condition for approval. If a complete response letter is issued, the applicant may resubmit the BLA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, withdraw the application, or request a hearing.

If a product candidate receives regulatory approval, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The approval may be significantly limited to specific diseases and dosages or the indications for use may otherwise be limited, which could restrict the commercial value of the product. Further, the FDA may require that certain contraindications, warnings, or precautions be included in the product labeling. The FDA may impose restrictions and conditions on product distribution, prescribing, or dispensing in the form of a risk management plan, or otherwise limit the scope of any approval. In addition, the FDA may require post marketing clinical trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, designed to assess further a biological product’s safety and effectiveness, and testing and surveillance programs to monitor the safety of approved products that have been commercialized.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA has four programs in place intended to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs and biologics intended to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening conditions. These are Fast Track Designation, Breakthrough Therapy Designation, Accelerated Approval Program, and Priority Review Designation.

The Fast Track program is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing a new product if it is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and it demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. Fast Track Designation applies to the combination of the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of a new drug or biologic may request the FDA to designate the drug or biologic as a Fast Track product at any time during the clinical development of the product. Unique to a Fast Track product, the FDA may consider for review sections of the marketing application on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted, if the sponsor provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the application, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the application and determines that the schedule is acceptable, and the sponsor pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the application.

A product can receive Breakthrough Therapy Designation if it is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that it may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. A Breakthrough Therapy Designation conveys all of the features of Fast Track Designation in addition to more intensive FDA guidance on an efficient development program, organizational commitment involving senior managers, and eligibility for priority review. Specifically, the FDA intends to expedite the development and review of a Breakthrough Therapy by, where appropriate, intensively involving senior managers and experienced review staff in a proactive collaborative, cross-disciplinary review. Where appropriate, the FDA also intends to assign a cross-disciplinary project lead for the review team to facilitate an efficient review of the development program. The FDA notes that a compressed drug development program still must generate adequate data to demonstrate that the drug or biologic meets the statutory standard for approval. Omitting components of the development program that are necessary for such a determination can significantly delay, or even preclude, marketing approval.

Breakthrough Therapy Designation indicates that preliminary clinical evidence demonstrates the drug may have substantial improvement on one or more clinically significant endpoints over available therapy. Breakthrough Therapy Designation intensifies FDA involvement to ensure an efficient drug development program and is an organizational commitment from the FDA to involve its senior managers. A sponsor receiving Breakthrough Therapy Designation has up to six months after receiving the Breakthrough Therapy Designation to request an Initial Comprehensive Multidisciplinary meeting to discuss the drug development program. This initial meeting is a Type B meeting, used to discuss the overarching, high-level plan for drug development. These discussions include topics such as planned clinical trials and endpoints, any resizing or adaptations to the trials, plans for expediting the manufacturing development strategy and studies that potentially could be completed after approval. When Breakthrough Therapy Designation has been granted, the FDA is encouraged to meet regularly with the sponsor and subsequent meetings are considered Type B meetings and are established based on the needs of the program.

The FDA may grant accelerated approval under its Accelerated Approval Program to a product candidate for a serious or life-threatening condition upon a determination that the product candidate has 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, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Accelerated approval is contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct at least one adequate and well-controlled additional post-approval trial to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval pre-approval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

Fast Track Designation, Breakthrough Therapy Designation, RMAT, and Accelerated Approval do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development process. Additionally, Fast Track Designation or Breakthrough Therapy Designation may be withdrawn by the FDA if the FDA believes that the designation is no longer supported by data emerging in the clinical trial process, including considering any new drug or biologic approvals that later the unmet medical need.

An application for a product candidate may be eligible to obtain Priority Review Designation if it is intended to treat a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application for a new product designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review. A Priority Review Designation means FDA’s goal is to take action on the marketing application within six months (compared to ten months under standard review) of the 60-day filing date. Priority Review Designation does not change the standards for approval but may expedite the review process.

Orphan Designation and Exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the United States will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug or biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA or NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA.

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product marketing exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA, to market the same biologic for the same use or indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the BLA or NDA application user fee.

A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or, as noted above, if the second applicant demonstrates that its product is clinically superior to the approved product with orphan exclusivity 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.

Post-Approval Requirements

Once a BLA is approved, maintaining post-approval compliance with applicable federal, state, and local statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved products are required to register the establishments where the approved products are made with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with GMP and other laws. Rigorous and extensive FDA regulation of products continues after approval, particularly with respect to GMP. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the production and distribution of clinical and commercial quantities of any products that we may commercialize. Manufacturers of our products are required to comply with applicable requirements in the GMP regulations, including quality control and quality assurance and maintenance of records and documentation. Other post-approval requirements include reporting of GMP deviations that may affect the identity, potency, purity and overall safety of a distributed product, record-keeping requirements, reporting of adverse effects, reporting updated safety and efficacy information, and complying with electronic record and signature requirements. After a BLA is approved, the product also may be subject to official lot release. As part of the manufacturing process, the manufacturer is required to perform certain tests on each lot of the product before it is released for distribution. If the product is subject to official release by the FDA, the manufacturer submits samples of each lot of product to the FDA together with a release protocol showing a summary of the history of manufacture of the lot and the results of all of the manufacturer’s tests performed on the lot. The FDA also may perform certain confirmatory tests on lots of some products before releasing the lots for distribution by the manufacturer. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain GMP compliance. Discovery of problems with a product after approval may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer, or holder of an approved BLA, including withdrawal of the product from the market. In addition, changes to the manufacturing process or facility generally require prior FDA approval before being implemented. Other types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications and additional labeling claims, are also subject to further FDA review and approval.

We also must comply with the FDA’s advertising and promotion requirements, such as those related to direct-to-consumer advertising, the prohibition on promoting products for uses or in patient populations that are not described in the product’s approved labeling (known as “off-label use”), industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities, and promotional activities involving the internet. Discovery of previously unknown problems or the failure to comply with the applicable regulatory requirements may result in restrictions on the marketing of a product or withdrawal of the product from the market as well as possible civil or criminal sanctions.

Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements after approval may subject an applicant or manufacturer to administrative or judicial civil or criminal sanctions and adverse publicity. FDA sanctions could include refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, clinical hold, warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, mandated corrective advertising or communications with doctors, debarment, restitution, disgorgement of profits, or civil or criminal penalties.

U.S. Patent Term Restoration

Depending upon the timing, duration, and specifics of the FDA approval of the use of our current and potential 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 ("Hatch-Waxman Amendments"). The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent restoration term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, patent term restoration cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND and the submission date of a BLA plus the time between the submission date of a BLA and the approval of that application. Only one patent applicable to an approved biological product is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration.

Biosimilars and Exclusivity

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 ("BPCIA") created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products shown to be highly similar to, or interchangeable with, an FDA-licensed reference biological product. The FDA has issued several guidance documents outlining an approach to review and approval of biosimilars.

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

The BPCIA includes, among other provisions:

The BPCIA also establishes procedures for identifying and resolving patent disputes involving applications submitted under section 351(k) of the PHSA.

The BPCIA is complex and its interpretation and implementation by the FDA remains unpredictable. In addition, government proposals have sought to reduce the 12-year reference product exclusivity period. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. As a result, the ultimate effect, implementation, and meaning of the BPCIA is subject to uncertainty.

Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information

Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA-regulated products, including biological products, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information on the website www.clinicaltrials.gov. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, trial sites and investigators, and other aspects of a clinical trial are then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of clinical trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of clinical development programs as well as clinical trial design.

Pediatric Information

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), BLAs or supplements to BLAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the biological product for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the biological product is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any biological product with orphan product designation except a product with a new active ingredient that is a molecularly targeted cancer product intended for the treatment of an adult cancer and directed at a molecular target determined by FDA to be substantially relevant to the growth or progression of a pediatric cancer that is subject to a BLA submitted on or after August 18, 2020.

The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (“BPCA”) provides a six-month extension of any non-patent exclusivity for a biologic if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug or biologic in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, the FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications under the BPCA are treated as priority applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers.

Additional U.S. Regulation

In the United States, our activities are potentially subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including but not limited to, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services ("CMS"), other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, for instance the Office of Inspector General, the U.S. Department of Justice ("DOJ"), and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments. For example, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs must comply with the anti-fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, the false claims laws, the physician payment transparency laws, the privacy and security provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act ("HIPAA"), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act ("HITECH") and similar state laws, each as amended.

In addition to the foregoing, state and federal laws regarding environmental protection and hazardous substances, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Resource Conservancy and Recovery Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, may affect our business. These and other laws govern our use, handling and disposal of various biological, chemical, and radioactive substances used in, and wastes generated by, our operations. If our operations result in contamination of the environment or expose individuals to hazardous substances, we could be liable for damages and governmental fines.

Federal and State Fraud and Abuse, Privacy and Transparency Laws

Federal and state fraud and abuse laws, which generally will not be applicable to us or our current and potential product candidates unless and until we obtain FDA marketing approval for any of our current and potential product candidates, include, among others, anti-kickback statutes, the False Claims Act and related stated state and federal laws, the Stark Law and related state and federal laws, transparency laws, privacy and regulation regarding providing drug samples, sales and marketing activities and our relationships with customers and payors as follows.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, individuals and entities from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, recommending, ordering, or arranging for the purchase, lease, recommendation or order of any health care item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid, or other federally financed healthcare programs. This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor. Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Affordable Care Act to a stricter standard such that 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. Further, the Affordable Care Act codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act.

HIPAA created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other actions, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payers, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent 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.

Federal false claims and civil monetary penalties laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, prohibit, among other things, any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal government, or knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used, a false statement to get a false claim paid. Several pharmaceutical and other health care companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the company’s marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses.

The majority of states also have statutes or regulations similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and false claims laws, which apply to items and services, reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payer.

GNPX US Equity

GNPX · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

Item 1. Business.

GNPX US Equity☆

GNPX · 10-K · period ended 2022-12-31

Item 1. Business.

GNPX US Equity