nk-10k_20201231.htm

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

Washington, D.C. 20549

FORM 10-K

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2020

Commission file number: 001-37507

NANTKWEST, INC.

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter)

3530 John Hopkins Court San Diego, California 92121

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (858) 633-0300

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

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

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

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES ☐ NO ☒

Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 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 Exchange Act). YES ☐ NO ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common stock held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on the Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2020, was approximately $415.4 million.

The number of shares of the Registrant’s common stock outstanding as of March 3, 2021 was 109,344,573.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

As noted herein, the information called for by Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10‐K is incorporated by reference to specified portions of the Registrant’s definitive proxy statement to be filed in conjunction with the Registrant’s 2021 Annual Meeting of Stockholders, which is expected to be filed not later than 120 days after the Registrant’s fiscal year ended December 31, 2020.

Table of Contents

Page

PART I

Item 1. Business 2

Item 1A. Risk Factors 37

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 84

Item 2. Properties 84

Item 3. Legal Proceedings 84

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 85

PART II

Item 6. Selected Financial Data 88

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 109

Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 110

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 151

Item 9B. Other Information 152

PART III

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 153

Item 11. Executive Compensation 153

Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 153

PART IV

Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules 154

Explanatory Note

As used in this Annual Report on Form 10‐K, or Annual Report, for the year ended December 31, 2020, the terms “NantKwest,” “the company,” “our,” “us” or “we” refer to NantKwest, Inc. and/or its subsidiaries.

PART I

Forward-Looking Statements

This Annual Report on Form 10-K, or this Annual Report, may contain “forward-looking statements” within the meaning of the federal securities laws made pursuant to the safe harbor provisions of the Private Securities Litigation Reform Act of 1995. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in these forward-looking statements as a result of various factors, including those set forth under Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors”, in this Annual Report. Except as required by law, we assume no obligation to update these forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise. These statements, which represent our current expectations or beliefs concerning various future events, may contain words such as “may,” “will,” “expect,” “anticipate,” “intend,” “plan,” “believe,” “estimate” or other words indicating future results, though not all forward-looking statements necessarily contain these identifying words. Such statements may include, but are not limited to, statements concerning the following:

• our ability to implement and support the Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration;

• our ability to consummate the proposed merger with ImmunityBio, Inc.;

• our ability to utilize multiple modes to induce cell death;

• our ability to attract additional third party collaborators;

• our ability to produce an “off-the-shelf” therapy;

• our ability to commercialize any approved products;

• the rate and degree of market acceptance of any approved products;

• our ability to attract and retain key personnel;

In addition, you should refer to Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors” of this Annual Report for a discussion of other important factors that may cause actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by the forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this Annual Report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if one or more of these forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame, or at all. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

This Annual Report also contains estimates, projections and other information concerning our industry, our business, and the markets for certain diseases, including data regarding the estimated size of those markets, and the incidence and prevalence of certain medical conditions. Information that is based on estimates, forecasts, projections, market research or similar methodologies is inherently subject to uncertainties and actual events or circumstances may differ materially from events and circumstances reflected in this information. Unless otherwise expressly stated, we obtained this industry, business, market, and other data from reports, research surveys, studies, and similar data prepared by market research firms and other third parties, industry, medical and general publications, government data, and similar sources.

Item 1. Business.

Overview

We are a pioneering clinical-stage immunotherapy company focused on harnessing the power of the innate immune system by using our natural killer cells, or NK cells, to treat cancer and viral infectious diseases. NK cells are the body’s first line of defense due to their innate ability to rapidly seek and destroy abnormal cells, such as cancer or virally infected cells, without prior exposure or co-activation by other support molecules that are typically required to train and activate adaptive immune cells such as T‐cells.

A critical aspect of our strategy is to invest significantly in innovating new therapeutic candidates, based upon our proprietary activated NK, or aNK, cell platform, and conducting clinical testing and scale manufacturing of our most promising biologic product candidates. We believe our aNK cell is capable of being manufactured as a cell-based “off-the-shelf” therapy that can be molecularly engineered in a variety of ways to boost its killing capabilities against cancers and virally infected cells.

We retain worldwide commercial rights to clinical and research data, intellectual property and know-how developed with our aNKcells, as well as clinical grade master and working cell banks of aNK, haNK and t‐haNK cell lines.

Agreement and Plan of Merger with ImmunityBio, Inc.

On December 21, 2020, NantKwest and ImmunityBio, Inc. (ImmunityBio) entered into an Agreement and Plan of Merger (the Merger Agreement), pursuant to which NantKwest and ImmunityBio agreed to combine their businesses. The Merger Agreement provides that a wholly owned subsidiary of NantKwest will merge with and into ImmunityBio (the Merger), with ImmunityBio continuing as the surviving company and being renamed NantCell, Inc., upon the terms and subject to the conditions therein. At the effective time of the Merger (the Effective Time), NantKwest’s name, as the parent of NantCell, Inc., will be changed to “ImmunityBio, Inc.”

At the Effective Time, each share of ImmunityBio common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time, subject to certain exceptions as set forth in the Merger Agreement, will be converted automatically into a right to receive 0.8190 shares of NantKwest common stock. At the Effective Time, each share of NantKwest common stock issued and outstanding immediately prior to the Effective Time, will remain an issued and outstanding share of the combined company. At the Effective Time, each outstanding option, warrant or restricted stock unit to purchase ImmunityBio common stock will be converted (using the merger exchange ratio of 0.8190) into an option, warrant or restricted stock unit, respectively, on the same terms and conditions immediately prior to the Effective Time, to purchase shares of common stock of the combined company.

Upon consummation of the Merger, on a fully-diluted basis, ImmunityBio stockholders and NantKwest stockholders will own approximately 72% and 28%, respectively, of the outstanding shares of common stock of the combined company. It is estimated that, immediately following the closing date, Dr. Patrick Soon‐Shiong, our Executive Chairman and principal stockholder, and his affiliates will beneficially own, in the aggregate, approximately 82% of the common stock of the combined company.

Following consummation of the Merger, shares of common stock of the combined company are expected to be listed on the Nasdaq Global Select Market under the symbol “IBRX”.

Under the terms and subject to the conditions set forth in the Merger Agreement, the closing of the Merger depends on a number of conditions being satisfied, including approval of the Merger by holders of a majority of the outstanding shares of NantKwest common stock as of the NantKwest record date (excluding all shares of NantKwest common stock beneficially owned by Dr. Patrick Soon‐Shiong and his affiliates Cambridge Equities, LP and Chan Soon‐Shiong Family Foundation or any of their respective controlled affiliates or any of the directors or executive officers of NantKwest or ImmunityBio).

On February 1, 2021, our Registration Statement on Form S-4, which was filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) in connection with the Merger, was declared effective by the SEC.

A special meeting of the stockholders of NantKwest will be held on March 8, 2021 to consider and vote on a proposal to approve the issuance of shares of common stock of NantKwest to security holders of ImmunityBio, and to consider and vote on a proposal to approve the Merger. Only holders of record of NantKwest common stock at the close of January 29, 2021, will be entitled to notice of and to vote at the special meeting.

We expect the Merger to close in the first quarter of 2021, subject to receipt of the requisite stockholder approvals and satisfaction of other customary closing conditions.

The Merger is expected to be accounted for as a transaction between entities under common control as Dr. Patrick Soon‐Shiong is the controlling stockholder of each of NantKwest and ImmunityBio. Upon the closing of the Merger, the net assets of ImmunityBio will be combined with those of NantKwest at their historical carrying amounts and the companies will be presented on a combined basis for all historical periods presented.

Our Off-the-Shelf Approach

Multiple Modes of aNK Directed Tumor Cell Killing. Our NK platform has demonstrated the ability to induce cell death in cancers and virally infected cells through a variety of concurrent mechanisms including:

All three modes of killing; Innate Killing, Antibody-Mediated Killing, and CAR-Directed Killing, are employed by our proprietary t‐haNK platform, which combines all the enhanced NK killing functions of aNK, haNK and taNK into a single product platform.

Our primary target therapeutic area is cancer, with a heavy emphasis on solid tumors. According to the National Cancer Institute, almost 1.9 million new cancer cases are expected to be diagnosed in the U.S. during 2021, adding to the 16.9 million already living with cancer. In addition, we plan to advance therapies for hematologic malignancies and virally induced infectious diseases.

Innate Killing—the aNK Platform. We have developed a unique NK cell platform, which we believe is capable of being manufactured as a cell-based “off-the-shelf” therapy that can be molecularly engineered in a variety of ways to boost its killing capabilities against cancers and virally infected cells. Unlike normal natural killer cells, our NK cells do not express the key inhibitory receptors that diseased cells often exploit to turn off the killing function of natural killer cells and escape elimination. We have developed a unique aNK cell, which omits key inhibitory receptors, while preserving critical activation receptors that enable selective innate targeting and killing of distressed and diseased cells. They do so through the recognition and binding of stress-proteins that are overexpressed on the surfaces of

Our aNK cells are also designed to deliver a more lethal blow to their target by delivering a larger payload of lytic enzymes and cytokines responsible for both direct and indirect killing when compared to other natural killer cells isolated from healthy donors. This is due to the higher density of lytic granules and larger cell volume possessed by aNK cells when compared to that of donor-derived natural killer cells. We believe that our aNK cells can be produced at commercial scale as a ‘living drug’ using our proprietary manufacturing and distribution processes to adequately address select global cancer markets.

Several phase I safety studies with unmodified aNK cells have been conducted in a variety of bulky hematological cancers and solid tumors, enrolling 46 patients in a range of dose levels and schedules with encouraging evidence of single-agent activity and a durable remission, including some complete responses in liquid tumors. Based on these earlier clinical trials, we have further modified our aNK platform through virus-free molecular engineering designed to leverage additional modes of killing available to aNKs, including antibody-mediated killing, the haNK platform, and both antibody-mediated and CAR-directed antigen targeted killing, the t‐haNK platform.

Antibody-Mediated Killing—the haNK Platform. We have genetically engineered our aNK cell platform using a virus-free method to overexpress high-affinity CD16 receptors, which bind to antibodies. These antibody-targeted haNK cells are designed to directly bind to IgG1-type antibodies, such as avelumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and rituximab with the intention of enhancing the cancer-killing efficacy of these antibodies by boosting the population of competent natural killer cells that can kill cancer cells through ADCC. Antibody products are abundantly utilized to treat cancer and it is estimated that they generate over $100 billion in reported annual sales. A growing number of studies suggest that clinically meaningful responses to these antibody therapies correlate directly with the overall health of a patient’s natural killer cell population and whether they express the high-affinity variant of the CD16 receptor. Currently available literature estimates that only approximately 10% to 15% of the addressable patient population eligible for antibody therapies carry high-affinity CD16 receptors. This implies that our haNK product candidate may have significant market potential as a combination therapy to potentially address a large number of patients who do not carry high-affinity CD16 receptors and, as a result, exhibit a poorer response to antibody therapies. We therefore intend to develop our haNK product candidate as a combination therapy with widely-used U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, approved antibody products such as avelumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and rituximab. Current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, master and working cell banks of our haNK product candidate have been successfully established and will serve as our source for product for our clinical trials and, if approved, commercialization going forward. We have optimized our manufacturing process partly by designing our haNK product candidate to not require IL‐2 cytokine supplementation to the growth media every few days, thereby enabling us to overcome a technically challenging and costly limitation that many other natural killer cell-based therapies face. We have also successfully established processes for large-scale production, cryopreservation and long-term storage of final dose forms, thereby optimizing production efficiencies and allowing for on-demand availability with minimal handling at the infusion sites. Our cryopreserved haNK product candidate has been cleared for clinical testing in several phase Ib/II clinical trials, including our phase II Merkel cell cancer study.

CAR-Directed Killing—the taNK Platform. We have genetically engineered our aNK platform to express CARs that target tumor-specific antigens found on the surfaces of cancers and virally infected cells. Our taNK cells are designed to bind directly to these surface antigens and induce cell death through the release of toxic granules directly into the tumor cells and release of cytokines and chemokines to recruit additional innate and adaptive immune responses, including the recruitment of cytotoxic T‐cells. These tumor antigens include checkpoint ligands, such as PD‐L1 and B7‐H4 as well as well-established tumor proteins such as CD19, HER2 and EGFR, all of which can be targeted individually by our engineered taNK products.

Preclinical evidence has been mounting which indicates that taNK cell activation through the binding of its CAR receptors to these cancer specific proteins may be potent enough to override many of the pre-existing inhibitory signals and immunosuppressive factors present in the tumor microenvironment that may be responsible for tumor resistance.

CAR-Directed and Antibody-Mediated Killing—the t‐haNK Platform. Our newest and most promising platform for the development of therapeutic product candidates is an innovative, bioengineered combination of our haNK and taNK platforms that incorporates all the features of our haNK platform together with a CAR. The resulting line of product candidates under this platform avails itself to all three modes of killing: innate, antibody-mediated and CAR-directed killing. These product candidates also include one or more additional expression elements such as functional cytokines, chemokines and trafficking factors, making them amongst the most versatile in our portfolio. These product candidates are intended to be combined with commercially available therapeutic antibodies to effectively target either two different epitopes of the same cancer specific protein or two entirely different cancer specific proteins. In addition to our two t‐haNK product candidates, PD‐L1.t‐haNK, currently in phase II testing, and CD19.t‐haNK, cleared to commence phase I testing, we believe a pipeline of prominent CARs for t‐haNK, including HER2 and EGFR, which are nearing IND submission, and others that are advancing through clinical enabling studies, will enable us to potentially address an even broader range of cancers as part of a chemotherapy-free combination regimen.

The Nant Cancer Vaccine. The Nant Cancer Vaccine, or NCV, program is a personalized therapy regimen, which utilizes our “off-the-shelf” NK cell platform as the backbone of the regimen. NCV consists of an initial tumor-conditioning regimen followed by a molecularly-informed immunologic conditioning therapy. More specifically, NCV combines the novel delivery of metronomic, albumin-linked low-dose chemotherapy in conjunction with certain other agents, followed by a sequenced administration of tumor-associated antigen vaccines and an IL‐15 superagonist fusion protein, all of which potentiate our NK cell therapy to potentially drive immunogenic cell death while avoiding the ravages of toxic high-dose chemotherapy. By inducing immunogenic cell death and enhancing a patient’s innate and adaptive immune system, NCV is designed to attain a long-term, durable response in multiple cancer types with a potential for lower toxicity and improved efficacy and quality of life in comparison with current standards of care. We believe ultimately that employing our NK cell therapy in the context of NCV will be a highly effective combination for long term clinical success over available standards of care that employ maximum tolerated dose, tolerogenic cell death and immune system compromise.

Potential Advantages of Our aNK Platform Over T‐Cell and Other Current Immunotherapies

The immune system has two components: innate immune cells, such as natural killer cells, which are always primed and ready to attack diseased cells, and adaptive immune cells, such as T‐cells, which are recruited and educated through a series of antigen presentation and clonal expansion, eventually mounting a delayed response. Our proprietary aNK platform is specifically designed to potentially address many of the limitations associated with current adaptive autologous cellular immunotherapies. We believe key limitations of adaptive autologous immunotherapy are the need to isolate adequate amounts of naive T‐cells from a cancer patient in a lengthy procedure called leukapheresis and the requirement for a complex individualized genetic transfection and expansion campaign to manufacture each patient’s therapy. As a consequence, current autologous CAR‐T cell therapies, in large part, are limited to patients from highly selected hematological cancers and leave many patients ineligible for treatment. Additionally, patients must undergo lympho-depleting chemotherapy prior to receiving CAR‐T therapy and rely on engraftment, thereby exposing themselves to life-threatening serious adverse events for extended periods. For instance, recipients of CD19 CAR‐T therapy develop life-long B‐cell aplasia and hypogammaglobulinemia, requiring immunoglobulin infusion therapy. Acutely, patients may develop cytokine release syndrome or acute or chronic neurotoxicities. Due to these and other events, treatment with CAR‐T requires intensive inpatient and long term monitoring. In contrast, our allogeneic “off-the-shelf” NK cells can be infused in the outpatient setting and do not rely on the patient as the source of suitable immune cells for processing, thereby availing every cancer patient as a potential candidate for on-demand treatment. In addition, our NK cell therapy is intended to be combined with immune potentiating agents, rather than immuno-depleting agents with the interest of driving a more natural and long-lasting adaptive immune response. This is largely due to the unique versatility of our cell products, which more closely approximates the characteristics of a drug rather than a transplant. Most cell-based immunotherapies are limited to one or a constrained number of doses due to product limitations and cost burdens, thereby

driving the need for immune-ablative therapies and reliance on long-term engraftment to achieve clinically meaningful results. In comparison, our NKcell based therapies can be re-dosed regularly throughout the year and at much higher dose levels without the same product limitations, cost burdens, reliance on long-term engraftment and potential exposure to long-term toxicities.

For these reasons, we believe that our approach includes the following advantages:

Experienced Management Team

Since the founding of our company in 2002, we have assembled a team of proven, experienced and visionary leaders in biotechnology. Our team is led by Patrick Soon‐Shiong, MBBch, FRCS (C), FACS, who has served as our Chairman since March 2015. Dr. Soon‐Shiong was first introduced to us in 2007 when our technology was at a very early stage of development and he provided us with advice and scientific development strategies, including demonstration of activity in the clinical setting following irradiation of the cells and demonstration of safety and activity following multiple infusions in patients with both end-stage solid and liquid tumors. Dr. Soon‐Shiong made an equity investment in our company in December 2014 and joined as our Chief Medical Officer in January 2015. Dr. Soon‐Shiong became our Chairman in March 2015 and served as our Chief Executive Officer, or CEO, from March 2015 until October 2020. Effective October 2020, Dr. Soon‐Shiong has served as our Executive Chairman of the board of directors. Dr. Soon‐Shiong, a renowned surgeon and scientist, has pioneered novel therapies for both diabetes and cancer, published over 100 scientific papers in the U.S., and has been issued over 230 worldwide patents on groundbreaking advancements spanning a myriad of fields. He performed the first encapsulated islet stem cell transplant in a diabetic patient in the U.S. He invented, developed and launched the first nanoparticle delivery system of human albumin, abraxane. Dr. Soon‐Shiong was founder, Chairman and CEO of American Pharmaceutical Partners (sold to Fresenius SE for approximately $4.6 billion in 2008), Abraxis BioScience (sold to Celgene Corporation for approximately $3.8 billion in 2010), and NantWorks, an ecosystem of companies to create a transformative global health information and next generation pharmaceutical development network.

Richard Adcock was appointed as our CEO in October 2020. Prior to joining NantKwest, Mr. Adcock served as CEO of Verity Health from January 2018 to September 2020. Verity Health was previously affiliated with Dr. Soon‐Shiong until 2018. Prior to Verity Health, Mr. Adcock served in various capacities at Sanford Health, including as its Chief Innovation Officer, President, Executive Vice President and Director from 2004 to 2017. Prior to Sanford Health, Mr. Adcock served as Global Engineering Director at GE Healthcare from 1999 to 2003.

Barry Simon, M.D., our President and Chief Administrative Officer, who was our CEO from May 2007 until March 2015 and our President and Chief Operating Officer from March 2015 to December 2016, brings decades of drug development and executive leadership experience from Roche Labs, F. Hoffmann‐La Roche, Connetics Corp. and Immunomedics, having successfully contributed to Biologics License Applications, or BLAs, and commercial drug launches for Xeloda, Pegasys, Kytril, Fortovase, Valcyte, Fuzeon and Tamiflu.

We have experienced executives leading our research and development, manufacturing, preclinical and clinical development, regulatory and medical affairs, finance and other critical areas of our business, and we continue to build our manufacturing and administrative infrastructure.

Company Vision

We aspire to be the premier immunotherapy company, with the ultimate goal of harnessing the power of the innate immune system—with the NK cell at its core—to pioneer precision medicine in treatments for cancers and viral infectious diseases.

Our Core Strategies

Our goal of becoming the world leader in immunotherapy for cancers and other diseases can be realized through a major reframing of how we apply the collective knowledge amassed in this field to date. This starts with precisely determining the ‘molecular address’ of the target disease and leveraging this knowledge in the selection and staging of both tumor and immune conditioning agents in accordance with our understanding of biological mechanisms of action and the natural order of immune biology. Metronomic, low-doses of certain agents would be utilized to potentiate cellular stress and boost tumor immunogenicity, while an array of other agents would be applied selectively and sequentially to propagate a meaningful and lasting adaptive immune response. We believe that by utilizing the NK cell as the backbone and central coordinator as we engage and sequentially orchestrate the entire ecosystem of immune cells, we can effectively empower the patient’s own immune system to regain control by becoming its own ‘drug factory’ that can establish and once again maintain a cancer-free environment in the body. The key elements of our strategy include:

Our Therapeutic Platforms

Leveraging Our Assets

We have developed a pre-clinical portfolio of t‐haNK products based on the combined attributes of our existing haNK and taNK platforms. We have also advanced our haNK product candidate into clinical trials across several solid-tumor types, which incorporates a comprehensively orchestrated tumor and immune-conditioning regimen known as the Nant Cancer Vaccine, or NCV, and generated compelling safety and activity data. We now plan to advance our lead clinical candidates from the haNK and t‐haNK platforms into checkpoint inhibitor and IL‐15 superagonist fusion protein combination trials in select cancer indications.

Our aNK Platform is the Foundation for Our haNK, taNK and t‐haNK Product Candidates. Based on the unique characteristics of our aNK cells, we continue to expand the potential therapeutic applications of this platform through molecular engineering designed to leverage the multiple modes of killing available to aNK cells, including (1) innate plus antibody-mediated killing, the haNK platform; (2) innate plus antigen targeted killing, the taNK platform; and (3) a combination of all three, the t‐haNK platform, as illustrated below.

Antibody-Mediated Killing - the haNK Platform. We have genetically engineered our aNK cells to both overexpress high-affinity CD16 receptors and the IL‐2 cytokine. These haNK cells are well suited to directly bind to concurrently administered therapeutic antibodies such as avelumab, trastuzumab, cetuximab and rituximab to potentially enhance their targeted cancer killing effects through ADCC, as illustrated below.

CAR-Directed Killing - the taNK Platform. We have genetically modified our aNK cells to incorporate CARs that target cancer specific proteins typically found on the surface of cancer cells. These taNK cells are designed to directly bind to these surface proteins in a variety of solid and hematological cancers and induce cell death through the release of toxic granules directly into the tumor cell and the release of cytokines and chemokines, which recruit additional innate and adaptive immune responses, including the recruitment of cytotoxic T‐cells. CARs are complex molecules that are designed to traverse the cell membrane and are comprised of four elements: (1) the antibody-derived single-chain Fv fragment, or scFv, which appears on the external membrane surface of the taNK cell, where it is exposed and available to bind to cancer specific antigens; (2) a transmembrane hinge region; (3) a CD28 co-stimulatory domain; and (4) one of several signaling domain segments which resides on the internal surface of the membrane where, upon external scFv binding, it is available to signal the activation cascade to release cytotoxic compounds to destroy the targeted cancer cell. Unlike CAR‐T and T‐cell receptor therapies, taNK killing is human leukocyte antigen, or HLA, independent for “off-the-shelf” applications and does not depend on additional (second-generation) co-stimulatory domains, such as 4‐1BB or OX40, which are often necessary in CAR‐T cells for immune cell activation and survival.

CAR-Directed and Antibody-Mediated Killing - the t‐haNK Platform. We have genetically engineered our aNK cells to exhibit all three mechanisms of killing, thereby imparting CAR targeted killing via cancer specific antigens, ADCC based killing as mediated by antibody products, innate killing inherent to natural killer cells, as well as independence from IL‐2 supplementation for expansion and viability. Based on this unique arrangement, t‐haNK cells can target two distinct cancer antigens at once: one via its CD16 receptor together with an antibody such as rituximab (CD20), and the other through its CAR receptor (i.e. PD‐L1), as illustrated below.

In the taNK and t‐haNK cell lines, the activation signaling that results from the binding of the CARs to the tumor-specific antigens can be strong enough to overcome both cancer escape mechanisms and suppressive factors present in the tumor microenvironment. These tumor antigens encompass three categories of proteins, all of which can be targeted individually by our engineered taNK products:

i. Checkpoint ligands, such as PD‐L1 and B7‐H4;

ii. Well-established tumor proteins such as CD19, HER2 and EGFR; and

iii. Novel surface antigens associated with cancer stem cells.

The table below is a partial list of CAR modified aNK products in the literature and their intended tumor types.

Non-Clinical Validation of Lenti- and Retroviral Generated taNK Cell Lines; a Compelling Case for Virus-Free t‐haNK-Based Therapies. We are preparing a novel lineup of virus-free t‐haNK product candidates that are cryopreserved, CAR expressing cell lines based on our haNK cell therapeutic, one of which is progressing through a phase II clinical trial. Our rapid advancement of the virus-free t‐haNK platform has enabled us to discontinue all use of viral vectors as a means to genetically enhance our platforms. These next-generation products avoid the safety concerns associated with the use of retro- and lentivirus sequences, incorporate the high-affinity CD16 receptor for enhanced antibody-mediated killing, as well as IL‐2 for IL‐2 growth independence, which can potentially reduce production costs and enhance clinical efficacy.

Latest Addition to Our Platforms

Our GMP-in-a-Box Approach

NantKwest is leading the efforts to generate allogeneic and autologous-sourced cell based products, the most advanced of which are our cytokine enriched memory-like NK, or ceNK, and mesenchymal stem cell, or MSC, therapeutics. We utilize a scalable GMP production process that combines the use of ImmunityBio’s (a related party) semi-automated manufacturing equipment and software, cytokine expansion and activation reagents, including ImmunityBio’s N‐803, and unique user-friendly processing methods, all of which are proprietary. We have optimized processes for generating both fresh and cryopreserved clinical dose forms of ceNK cells with 100% purity (in the allogeneic setting) from a variety of sources, including cord blood and allogeneic and autologous peripheral blood. We have also optimized processes for generating fresh and cryopreserved clinical dose forms of MSCs from cord blood, cord tissue and allogeneic bone marrow sources. We avoid the use of both feeder-layers and feeder-layer derived substances for activation as well as other commonly applied additives that frequently create downstream issues in achieving a high-quality, operator-friendly reproducible final dose form and have been able to generate multiple dose forms from each donor product, both of which are critical features in achieving scalability.

Cytokine Enriched Natural Killer (ceNK) Cell Platform. Cytokine-induced memory-like NK cells are a unique set of lymphocytes that differentiate after a brief pre-activation with interleukin‐12 (IL‐12), IL‐15, and IL‐18 and exhibit enhanced responses to cytokine re-stimulation that include enhanced interferon‐g production and cytotoxicity against leukemic cell lines. These cells have been isolated and characterized by their unique cell-surface marker profile and their highly desirable feature of immune-memory, marked by their pronounced anti-cancer activity for weeks to months in duration, which has made these cells a research focus for more than a decade.

Based on published literature, we believe the ability to generate these memory-like cells at clinically meaningful quantities has been limited to the work performed at Washington University by T.A. Fehniger, et al. Published data so far has been limited to the acute myeloid leukemia patient population in the post-allogeneic, haploidentical stem cell transplantation setting, for which the Fehniger group has generated enough cells to provide a one-time dose of these cytokine-activated, memory-like natural killer cells.

Our cytokine enriched natural killer cell program is based on the ability to enrich and expand donor-sourced natural killer cells in a GMP facility to a clinically relevant scale, which allows for the production of a pure cytokine activated and expanded NK cell population that possesses the unique phenotype we specifically refer to as M‐ceNK cells.

We have developed a unique ability to generate a portfolio of distinct ceNK cell products through the application of ImmunityBio’s proprietary GMP-in-a-Box bioreactors and cytokines and our proprietary methods and overall expertise in scale manufacturing of NK cell based products.

Mesenchymal Stem Cell (MSC) Platform. Bone marrow-derived allogeneic MSCs are considered to be a prominent cell type to treat degenerative diseases and autoimmune disorders. MSCs are reported to be immunoprivileged, allowing for transplantation of allogeneic MSCs without the risk of being rejected by the host immune system. MSCs have been found to be capable of modulating immune responses, thereby reducing inflammation as well as immunopathology and protecting alveolar epithelial cells during acute respiratory distress syndrome, or ARDS, including that triggered by cytokine storm. More importantly, MSCs demonstrated promising activity in reducing the non-productive inflammation and in promoting lung generation in a phase II clinical trial, as well as in patients with ARDS in clinical practice. As a result, we believe MSCs have the potential to alleviate the SARS‐CoV‐2-derived cytokine storm and ARDS, and thereby have an effect on the treatment of subsequent chronic respiratory dysfunction and lung fibrosis.

We have developed and optimized procedures and proprietary protocols to generate multiple dose forms of MSC products from a single bone marrow or cord tissue sample, in a scalable format using ImmunityBio’s GMP-in-a-Box system.

Development Update on our Product Candidates

Our leading programs reside in two core disease areas: Oncology, which includes our haNK and PD‐L1.t‐haNK programs, and COVID‐19, which includes our joint BM‐Allo‐MSC therapeutic and hAd5 vaccine programs. We also have a pipeline of IND-ready t‐haNK and ceNK projects in both solid and liquid cancers.

Pancreatic Cancer

Pancreatic cancer is one of the deadliest cancers for patients in the U.S. Pancreatic cancer is the third leading cause of cancer-related death in the U.S., behind only lung cancer and colorectal cancer, and is expected to become the second-leading cause after lung cancer by the early 2020’s. The overall five-year survival rate is just 9%. In 2019, an estimated 56,770 people were diagnosed with pancreatic cancer in the U.S., and approximately 45,750 of those newly diagnosed will die from the disease. Pancreatic cancer is the ninth-most commonly diagnosed cancer in women and the tenth-most commonly diagnosed cancer in men. Only about 20% to 30% of cases are found early enough to treat surgically, before the cancer has spread, and surgery gives the only chance that this cancer can be eradicated. Treatment options for pancreatic cancer patients include surgery, chemotherapy, radiation therapy, targeted therapy, immunotherapy, and clinical trials. Pancreatic cancer is uniformly accepted as an area of serious unmet medical need, with five-year relative survival rates by SEER stage at diagnosis of 37% for localized, 12% for regional, 3% for distant, and 9% for all SEER stages combined.

QUILT 88 is a phase II, open-label, randomized, three-cohort comparative study of PD‐L1.t‐haNK, N‐803 and aldoxorubicin in combination with standard-of-care therapy versus standard-of-care therapy alone for front-line maintenance, second-line and third-line or greater treatment of 298 subjects with locally advanced or metastatic pancreatic cancer. Each of the three cohorts are being conducted as standalone studies:

B. in second-line therapy, and

C. in third-line therapy or greater.

Cohorts A and B will have their own control arms while cohort C will be conducted as a single-arm, open-label study. Safety and progression-free survival for cohorts A and B will be compared within the groups using RECIST Version 1.1 criteria based on blinded independent central review. Secondary objectives include initial safety and additional efficacy measures, including overall response rate, complete response rate, durability of response, disease control rate, and overall survival.

All three study cohorts of the trial are open and actively enrolling patients at Hoag Memorial Hospital Presbyterian in Orange County, California, the Immuno-Oncology Clinic, Inc. in Los Angeles County, California, and Avera McKennan Hospital and University Health Center in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, the latter serving patients in the tri-state area of Iowa, Nebraska and South Dakota. More than 50 patients are currently enrolled in or being evaluated for the trial.

In our initial Cancer Moonshot QUILT trials of haNK and avelumab (PD‐L1 checkpoint inhibitor) for patients with metastatic pancreatic cancer, we explored the hypothesis that by activating the patient’s own immune system, a paradigm change in cancer therapy could evolve to eradicate cancer cells without high-dose chemotherapy. From 2017 to 2020, multiple QUILT clinical trials exploring the combination of haNK cell therapy, immune-modulating antibodies, adenovirus-based cancer vaccines, and low-dose chemotherapy provided preliminary results showing the median survival rate can be more than doubled, compared to historical controls, from three months to eight months.

In an expanded access program for patients with advanced metastatic pancreatic cancer who had no available approved treatment options, a complete remission was achieved when replacing haNK and PD‐L1 checkpoint inhibitor avelumab with PD‐L1.t‐haNK and four out of five patients are alive 8 to 16 months since beginning treatment on these expanded protocols as of January 12, 2021.

On the basis of these initial studies, we initiated our QUILT 88 trials in metastatic pancreatic cancer in October 2020. While the data are still early study in cohort C, for which the primary endpoint is overall survival, 15 out of 18 (83%) of the patients enrolled with second-line or greater pancreatic cancer remain alive as of January 12, 2021.

Triple Negative Breast Cancer

Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women in the U.S., the second most common cause of cancer death, and the main cause of death in women ages 45 to 55 years. In 2019, the latest year for which incidence data are available, 268,600 women in the U.S. were diagnosed with breast cancer, and an estimated 41,760 women died of the disease. Triple Negative Breast Cancer, or TNBC, accounts for approximately 15% of all breast cancers. Of these TNBC cases, about 75% are "basal-like." TNBC is a subtype of breast cancer that lacks expression of the estrogen receptor, or ER, and progesterone receptor, or PR, and does not overexpress the human epidermal growth factor 2 receptor, or HER2, protein. TNBC is an important area of research for both researchers and clinicians alike because:

i. TNBC is a poor prognostic factor for disease-free and overall survival;

ii. No effective specific targeted therapy is readily available for TNBC;

The prevalence of TNBC is highest in premenopausal African American women. A recent report notes that 39% of all African American premenopausal women diagnosed with breast cancer are diagnosed with TNBC. The prevalence of TNBC in this same age group in non-African American women is much lower, at approximately 15%. After adjusting for age and stage at diagnosis, African American women were almost three times more likely than white women to have triple-negative tumors. These ethnic or menopausal differences are not seen in either the ER+/HER2+ breast cancer subgroup or the ER+/HER2– subgroup. Five-year relative survival rates for TNBC by SEER stage at diagnosis are 91% for localized, 65% for regional, and 11% for distant.

TNBC has fewer treatment options than other types of invasive breast cancer. This is because the cancer cells do not have the estrogen or progesterone receptors or enough of the HER2 protein to make hormone therapy or targeted drugs work. If the cancer has not spread to distant sites, surgery is an option. Chemotherapy might be given first to shrink a large tumor followed by surgery. Chemotherapy might also be given after surgery to reduce the chances of the cancer coming back. Radiation might also be an option depending on certain features of the tumor.

Because hormone therapy and HER2 drugs are not choices for women with TNBC, chemotherapy is often used. In cases where the cancer has spread to other parts of the body (i.e., stage IV) chemotherapy and other treatments that can be considered include PARP inhibitors, platinum chemotherapy, or immunotherapy.

QUILT 3.067 is a phase II, open-label, single-arm trial evaluating the same novel triple combination of “off-the-shelf” haNK cell therapy with N‐803 and avelumab following a tumor conditioning regimen in subjects that have progressed on or after standard-of-care therapy for TNBC. Patient follow-up concluded during the third quarter of 2020 for the long-term responders in the trial and final data is being collated for a final study report. We last reported an overall response rate by immune response RECIST criteria in 6 of 9 patients (67%), a complete response rate in 3 of 9 patients (33%) (one unconfirmed), a median progression-free survival by immune response RECIST criteria of 14.3 months and a median overall survival of 20.2 months.

With the recent FDA approval of sacituzumab in patients with third-line TNBC, based on a 33% overall response rate, we believe that the addition of PD‐L1.t‐haNK and N‐803 may result in meaningful improvements in clinical outcomes. As such, we are preparing for an open-label, randomized controlled phase III trial of PD‐L1.t‐haNK and N‐803 in combination with sacituzumab versus sacituzumab alone. For the primary objective, we will compare the overall response rate between the two arms using RESIST criteria in solid tumors, Version 1.1. Secondary objectives will include assessments of safety, event-free survival, overall survival and durability of response using the same RESIST Version 1.1 criteria. The study will contain a safety lead-in phase in which the safety and tolerability of sacituzumab + PD‐L1.t‐haNK + N‐803 will be assessed prior to the Phase III portion of the study. We anticipate filing an IND in the first quarter of 2021.

Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer

Lung cancer is the second most common cancer. The American Cancer Society estimates that about 235,760 new cases of lung cancer will be diagnosed in the U.S. in 2021 and an estimated 131,880 patients will die of the disease. Non-small cell lung cancer, or NSCLC, is often insidious, producing no symptoms until the disease is well advanced. NSCLC makes up about 80% to 85% of all lung cancers. The three main types of NSCLC are squamous cell carcinoma, and non-squamous cell carcinoma, consisting of adenocarcinoma and large cell carcinoma. Adenocarcinoma is the most common form of lung cancer in the U.S., among both men and women. Squamous cell carcinoma, is the second most prevalent, accounting for 25% of all lung cancers. Large cell carcinoma is the smallest, accounting for approximately 10% of NSCLC tumors. Early recognition of symptoms may be beneficial to outcome. At initial diagnosis, 20% of patients have localized disease, 25% of patients have regional metastasis, and 55% of patients have distant spread of disease. Symptoms depend on the location of cancer.

The five-year survival rate for NSCLC is 24%. However, it is important to note that survival rates depend on several factors, including the subtype of lung cancer, and the stage of disease. For people with localized NSCLC, which means the cancer has not spread outside of the lung, the overall five-year survival rate is 61%. For regional NSCLC, which means the cancer has spread outside of the lung to nearby areas, the five-year survival rate is approximately 35%. If the cancer has spread to distant parts of the body, called metastatic lung cancer, the five-year survival rate is 6%. As a result of new effective treatments, this number is changing, although better therapies are acutely needed.

QUILT 3.055 is a phase IIb, open-label, multi-cohort study of combination immunotherapy in patients with NSCLC who have previously received treatment with immune checkpoint inhibitors. Patients are eligible to enter into the cohort designated to receive third-line combination immunotherapy consisting of PD‐L1.t‐haNK cell therapy, N‐803 and a checkpoint inhibitor after progressing on one of four other treatment cohorts within the study. The primary efficacy endpoint of the study is overall response rate per RECIST Version 1.1. Secondary endpoints include progression-free survival, overall survival and durability of response using RECIST Version 1.1 criteria. The IND amendment to include this third-line study cohort has been authorized by the FDA. Observed responses in this trial will guide our plans to conduct a subsequent phase II trial in second-line NSCLC patients.

Merkel Cell Carcinoma

Merkel cell carcinoma, or MCC, is a rare and aggressive skin cancer that arises from uncontrolled growth of cells in the skin. Increasing in incidence, approximately 2,000 new cases are reported in the U.S. each year. Patients with metastatic or locally advanced MCC have an extremely poor prognosis, with less than 20% of patients surviving longer than five years. Typically, these patients are treated with a range of drugs, including chemotherapy, which can result in significant side effects. Although new immune therapies have the potential to improve survival, MCC is still fatal for a majority of patients who have progressed on or after treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor and represents an unmet medical need.

QUILT 3.063 is our phase II, open-label, single-arm trial evaluating the novel triple combination of “off-the-shelf” haNK cell therapy with N‐803 and avelumab, without chemotherapy in subjects that have progressed after treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor for MCC. This trial is currently open at multiple centers across the U.S. As a rare disease, with approximately 2,000 patients being diagnosed in the U.S. each year, MCC patients often require regional referral and additional travel to a clinical trial site. The ongoing COVID‐19 pandemic has continued to have an impact on enrollment due in part to limitations in travel and study accessibility as well as a significant reduction in patient referrals. In response to this, we will continue to implement measures to increase local community awareness of the trial as we add new sites. While we remain cautiously optimistic, it may require additional time to reach our interim data readout.

Additional Oncology Programs Update

We anticipate pursuing additional indications for our PD‐L1.t‐haNK product candidate, such as in the neoadjuvant setting in combination with N‐803 and a checkpoint inhibitor for newly diagnosed patients with head and neck squamous cells cancers in collaboration with the National Cancer Institute. In the near future we also plan to initiate a series of phase I first-in-human trials with our IND-ready t‐haNK products HER2.t‐haNK, EGFR.t‐haNK and the FDA authorized CD19.t‐haNK. Likewise, we are nearing an IND filing for a phase I ceNK trial in locally advanced solid cancers.

COVID‐19 Programs Update

QUILT‐COVID‐19‐MSC is a randomized, double-blind placebo-controlled phase Ib study to assess the safety of therapeutic treatment with immunomodulatory bone marrow-derived MSC, or BM‐Allo‐MSC, in adults with severe COVID‐19 infection. This clinical trial will evaluate the safety and efficacy of BM‐Allo‐MSC versus best supporting care in treating patients with severe disease requiring ventilator support during COVID‐19 infection. A total of 45 subjects receiving care in the critical care or ICU setting for COVID‐19 will be enrolled in this study. Subjects will be randomized in a 2:1 fashion to the experimental and control arms, respectively. Primary endpoints include incidence of adverse events, mortality and number of ventilator-free days within 60 days of randomization. All subjects will also be assessed using the standard National Early Warning Score, or NEWS score (Royal College of Physicians 2012).

A second, more efficient commercial source of MSC cells has been developed in-house, using cord tissue. Consequently, we recently filed a second IND for CT‐Allo‐MSC cells using the same trial design and plan to shift our clinical trial effort to this new protocol, which we plan to open at several clinical sites in Southern California, including Hoag Hospital in Newport Beach, California.

QUILT 4001 is an hAd5 adenoviral COVID vaccine trial operated by our affiliate, ImmunityBio, under a Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration Agreement, described below. This phase Ib, open-label study will evaluate the safety, reactogenicity and immunogenicity of prophylactic vaccination with a second generation E1, E2b and E3 deleted human adenovirus‐5 vaccine in normal healthy volunteers. The test article is an hAd5‐S‐Fusion+N‐ETSD vaccine which encodes for an optimized spike protein (S‐Fusion), to enhance stability and cell surface expression of the receptor binding domain of the SARS‐CoV‐2 spike protein, and a Nucleocapsid protein with an enhanced T‐cell stimulation domain (N‐ETSD) to enhance cell-mediated immunity.Two cohorts of ten subjects will receive either 5×1010 or 1×1011 virus particles per dose on days 1 and 22 and a third cohort of fifteen patients would receive the highest safe dose administered in the two initial cohorts. Safety and activity will be assessed for up to twelve months after the second dose. Toxicities will be graded using the Guidance for Industry - Toxicity Grading Scale for Healthy Adult and Adolescent Volunteers Enrolled in Preventive Vaccine Clinical Trials (2007).

As a result of the emergence of rapidly evolving resistance mutations in the spike protein, an IND amendment has been filed under the ongoing QUILT 4001to incorporate a sublingual (SL) formulation of the hAd5‐S‐Fusion+N‐ETSD vaccine, thereby expanding the trial to a total of 60patients across sixstudy cohorts. In addition, a second IND has been filed to test an oral formulation in a separate phase Ib trial in the U.S. This trial, QUILT4005, will study an additional 40patients across fourcohorts.The oral formulation employed is stable at room temperatures, which may help alleviate cold-chain logistics issues that have slowed deployment of currently approved COVID‐19 vaccines. Additionally, the oral and SL formulations are designed to enhance IgA secretion and may confer greater protection against infection. On February11, 2021, we announced that the IND amendment for QUILT4001 and the new IND for QUILT4005 have been authorized by the FDA. These studies are now actively enrolling patients at Hoag Hospital, in Newport Beach, California. Once these new formulations have been tested for safety and immunogenicity, we will then proceed with a planned phase II/III trial using the most optimal combination.

The following table summarizes our current development programs:

N-803 is an IL-15RαFc Superagonist, a proprietary therapeutic cytokine designed to induce expansion of native NK and CD8+ T‐cells without concurrent stimulation of T‐regulatory cells; Aldoxorubicin (Aldox) is a proprietary albumin-bound doxorubicin complex that is designed to preferentially accumulate in a tumor’s low pH environment. Both agents are in late-stage clinical development by our affiliate, ImmunityBio, which has exclusive, worldwide rights to the agents. Avelumab is an FDA approved checkpoint inhibitor marketed by Pfizer.

* Program owned by NantKwest and subject to Joint Development Agreement with ImmunityBio.

† Program owned by ImmunityBio and subject to Joint Development Agreement with NantKwest.

‡ QUILT number not yet designated.

Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration Agreement with ImmunityBio

On August 21, 2020, we entered into a definitive agreement, which we refer to as the Collaboration Agreement, with ImmunityBio to pursue collaborative joint development, manufacturing and marketing of certain COVID‐19 therapeutics and vaccines. The terms of the Collaboration Agreement supersede and replace the terms of the binding term sheet executed on May 22, 2020. Through their efforts, the parties agreed to jointly develop ceNK, haNK, MSC, hAd5, and N‐803, a novel IL‐15 superagonist fusion protein, for the prevention and treatment of SARS‐CoV‐2 viral infections and associated conditions in humans, including without limitation, COVID‐19. Pursuant to the Collaboration Agreement, we have contributed our ceNK, haNK, and MSC product candidates and certain of our manufacturing capabilities, and ImmunityBio has contributed their hAd5 and N‐803 product candidates. hAd5 has been developed as a vaccine, and ceNK, haNK, MSC and N‐803 have each been developed as therapeutics for treating COVID‐19 at various stages of infection.

From and after the effective date of the Collaboration Agreement, the parties will share equally in all costs relating to developing and manufacturing of the product candidates globally with the exception of certain laboratory equipment purchases that will be borne solely by us. With the exception of N‐803, we will be primarily responsible for the manufacture of each product. Each party will be responsible for the regulatory affairs and the commercialization relating to its contributed products. The global net profits from the collaboration products will be shared 60%/40% in favor of the party contributing the product on which the sales are based except if the parties mutually agree because of certain circumstances. All net profits from sales of combined collaboration products will be shared equally. This collaboration is supervised by a joint steering committee, which is comprised of an equal number of representatives from both parties. The term of the agreement will be five years and it is renewable for an additional five year period upon mutual agreement. Each party will also have a right to terminate in the event of material breach, bankruptcy, or insolvency.

In this Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration, we contributed the following programs:

ImmunityBio contributed the following programs:

In addition to the above programs contributed by each party, we have contributed our manufacturing capabilities in the form of facilities, equipment, personnel and related know-how, including our GMP manufacturing facility in El Segundo, California, and ImmunityBio has contributed certain manufacturing equipment and related technology and know-how. To date, NantKwest and ImmunityBio have each prepared a GMP-ready manufacturing plant for COVID‐19 vaccine production, which we and ImmunityBio expect will have a combined estimated capacity to produce sufficient clinical supply for our planned studies in 2021. We have prepared one of our GMP manufacturing facilities previously used to manufacture product for our oncology trials to manufacture and produce the hAd5 vaccine candidate and have readied a new, well-equipped location to manufacture and produce clinical products for our oncology trials, which resulted in additional facilities and related facility operating costs starting in the third quarter of 2020. We have established a clinical product inventory to continue to supply clinical product for our ongoing oncology trials while this new facility was being readied. The new facility will resume clinical product supply for our oncology trial starting in early 2021. In addition, we have repurposed some of our personnel overseeing quality of our oncology programs to support the Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration. We also expect to hire additional staff to support the Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration. We believe the Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration will have no material impact on our current oncology efforts and trials, and we expect that we will be able to continue to manufacture adequate product to continue our ongoing oncology trials.

Competition

The biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by intense and dynamic competition to develop new technologies and proprietary therapies. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will have to compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future. We believe that our base proprietary aNK platform, differentiated haNK, taNK and t‐haNK product candidates, strategic collaborations and cell-based immunotherapy expertise may provide us with competitive advantages. However, we face potential competition from various sources, including larger and better-funded pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, as well as from academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. The key competitive factors affecting the success of any approved product will include its efficacy, safety profile, pricing, and method of administration, as well as the level of promotional activity invested in it.

Our haNK, taNK, t‐haNK and ceNK product candidates compete with other cell and molecule-based immunotherapy approaches using or targeting natural killer cells, NKT cells, T‐cells, and dendritic cells. Competitors focused on CAR‐T related treatment approaches include AbbVie Inc., Atara Biotherapeutics, Inc., Precigen Corporation, Inc., Allogene Therapeutics, Inc., Bristol‐Myers Squibb Company, Beijing Immunochina Pharmaceuticals Co., Ltd., Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., iCell Gene Therapeutics LLC, JW Therapeutics Co., Ltd., Amgen, Inc., Leucid Bio Ltd., Bellicum Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Medisix Therapeutics Pte Ltd., Bluebird Bio, Inc., Mesoblast Ltd., Calibr/Scripps Research, Mustang Bio, Inc., Carina Biotech, Inc., CARsgen Therapeutics, CRISPR Therapeutics, Inc., GEMoaB Monoclonals GmbH, Nanjing Legend Biotechnology Co., Ltd, Cartherics Pty Ltd, Novartis AG, Pfizer, Inc., Cellectis SA, Poseida Therapeutics, Inc., Prepromene Bio, Inc., Celularity, Inc., Servier Laboratories, Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., Celyad SA, Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, Fortress Biotech, Inc., TC BioPharm Ltd., Tessa Therapeutics Pte Ltd, Gilead Sciences, Inc., Tmunity Therapeutics, Inc., Transposagen Biopharmaceuticals, Inc., Humanigen, Inc., Immune Therapeutics, Inc., and Xyphos, Inc./Astellas.

Competitor companies focused on other T‐cell based approaches include Adaptimmune Ltd., Adicet Bio, Inc., Autolus Therapeutics, plc, Cell Medica Limited, Eureka Therapeutics, Inc., Formula Pharmaceuticals, Inc., GlaxoSmithKline plc., Green Cross LabCell Corp., Immatics Biotechnologies GmbH, Immunocore Limited, Iovance Biotherapeutics, Inc., Kiadis Pharma Netherlands B.V., Lion TCR Pte Ltd., MolMed, S.p.A., Precision Biosciences, Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Noile‐Immune Biotech, Inc., Anixa Biosciences, Inc., Beam Therapeutics Inc., BioNTech SE, Cartesian Therapeutics, Inc., Marker Therapeutics, Inc., Refuge Biotechnologies, Inc., Repertoire Immune Medicines, Inc., Sensei Biotherapeutics, Inc., Senti Biosciences, Inc., TCR2 Therapeutics Inc., TScan Therapeutics, Inc., and Takara Bio, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on dendritic cell based approaches include Argos Therapeutics, Inc., Biovest International, Inc., ImmunoCellular Therapeutics, Ltd., Merck & Co, Inc./Immune Design, Inc., Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Precigen Corporation, Inc., Medigene AG, and Northwest Biotherapeutics, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on natural killer cell based approaches include Acepodia, Inc., Carabou Biosciences, Inc., Catamaran Bio Inc., Celularity, Inc., Century Therapeutics, Inc., Cytovia Therapeutics, Inc., Glycostem Therapeutics BV, Kiadis Pharma Netherlands B.V./CytoSen Therapeutics, Inc., Dragonfly Therapeutics, Inc., Editas Medicine, Inc., EMERcell, Exacis Biotherapeutics, Inc., Fate Therapeutics, Inc., Gamida Cell, Ltd., INmune Bio Inc., Nkarta Therapeutics, Inc., Onkimmune Ltd., Oncternal Therapeutics, Inc., NKMax America, Artiva Biotherapeutics/Merck, HebeCell Corp., Vycellix, Inc., oNKo‐innate Pty Ltd., ONK Therapeutics Limited, Sanofi, S.A., Shoreline Biosciences, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Limited, XNK Therapeutics AB, Zelluna Immunotherapy AS, and Ziopharm Oncology, Inc.

Competitor companies focused on large molecule immunotherapy approaches, including those overlapping the natural killer cell space, include Cytomx Therapeutics, Inc., Compass Therapeutics, Inc., Innate Pharma SA, Nektar Therapeutics, Inc., and Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc.

Other potential immunotherapy competitors include Affimed GmbH, AgenTus Therapeutics, Inc., Agios Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Codiak Biosciences, Glycostem Therapeutics BV, Kuur Therapeutics Limited, Triumvira Immunologics, Incysus Therapeutics, Inc., GammaDelta Therapeutics Ltd., Lyell Immunopharma, Inc., and GT Biopharma, Inc.

There are currently four approved T‐cell based treatments that are marketed by Novartis AG, Gilead Sciences/Kite Pharma (two therapeutics), and the Bristol‐Myers Squibb Company. There is currently one approved dendritic cell-based cancer vaccine marketed by Dendron Pharmaceuticals, LLC for the treatment of metastatic castration resistant prostate cancer.

Competitor companies focused on COVID‐19 cell therapy currently include AstraZeneca plc, Athersys, Inc./Healios K.K., Capricor Therapeutics, Inc., CAR‐T (Shanghai) Biotechnology, Cellavita Pesquisa Científica Ltda, Cellenkos, Inc., Cellular Biomedicine Group, Inc., Celularity, Inc., Sorrento Therapeutics, Inc., Chinese Academy of Sciences, Chongqing Sidemu Biotechnology Technology/ImmunCyte Life Sciences, Inc., Enlivex Therapeutics Ltd, Green Cross LabCell Corp., Hope Biosciences, Johnson & Johnson, Mesoblast Limited, Moderna, Inc., NovaVax, Inc., Orbsen Therapeutics Limited, Pfizer, Inc./BioNTech SE, Pluristem Therapeutics, Inc., Rigshospitalet, Tianhe Stem Cell Biotechnologies Inc., University of Minnesota/Fate Therapeutics, Inc., and Xinjiang Medical University.

In addition, a very large number of companies, government agencies and academic centers around the world are developing COVID‐19 vaccines, and many of these entities are in more advanced stages of development than ImmunityBio, including some that have started Phase II and/or III clinical trials or already have emergency regulatory approval in some regions. Even if ImmunityBio’s COVID‐19 vaccine candidate is ultimately approved for marketing, the value of our profit-sharing opportunity would be adversely impacted if other COVID‐19 vaccines are approved earlier or show better efficacy or safety than ImmunityBio’s COVID‐19 vaccine candidate.

Many of our competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do, as well as significantly greater experience in the discovery and development of product candidates, obtaining FDA and other regulatory approvals of treatments and commercializing those treatments. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than us in obtaining approval for treatments and achieving widespread market acceptance. Our competitors’ treatments may be more effective, or more effectively marketed and sold, than any treatment we may commercialize, and they may render our treatments obsolete or non-competitive before we can recover the expenses of developing and commercializing any of our treatments.

Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, and establishing clinical study sites and subject registration for clinical studies, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or clinical-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

We anticipate that we will face intense and increasing competition as new therapies enter the market and advanced technologies become available. We expect any treatments that we develop and commercialize to compete on the basis of, among other things, efficacy, safety, convenience of administration and delivery, price, the level of generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have a better safety profile, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. In addition, we expect that our therapeutic products, if approved, will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products and our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of generic products.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to our business, including seeking, maintaining, and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing patent applications in the U.S. and in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements, and product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We seek to consistently file follow-on patent applications on further improvements and features of our NK cell-based products, thereby adding additional layers of protection and reducing reliance on our original patents that would be the earliest to expire and may be subject to challenge. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology and product candidates, continuing innovation, and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen, and maintain our proprietary position in the field of natural killer cell-based immunotherapy. We expect to rely on data exclusivity, market exclusivity, patent term adjustments and patent term extensions when available, as well as on regulatory protection afforded through orphan drug designations. Our commercial success may depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our technology, inventions, and improvements; to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; to maintain our licenses to use intellectual property owned by third parties; to defend and enforce our proprietary rights, including our patents; and to operate without infringing on the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties.

We have developed and in-licensed numerous patents and patent applications and we possess substantial know-how and trade secrets relating to the development and commercialization of natural killer cell-based immunotherapy product candidates, including related manufacturing processes and technology. As of December 31, 2020, our owned and licensed patent portfolio consists of 66 patents and pending patent applications and provisional filings in the U.S. disclosing subject matter directed to certain of our proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements and our most advanced product candidates, as well as 216 licensed and owned patents and pending applications in 24 jurisdictions outside of the U.S., including 26 Patent Cooperation Treaty applications, that, in many cases, are counterparts to the foregoing U.S. patents and patent applications. For example, these patents and patent applications include claims directed to:

• Natural Killer Cell Line Compositions and Methods-of-Use;

• Treatment of Cancer using Natural Killer Cell Lines;

• Treatment of Specific Diseases using Natural Killer Cell Lines;

• Combination Therapy using Natural Killer Cell Lines;

• CD16 Modified Natural Killer Cell Line Compositions and Methods-of-Use;

• CAR‐Expressing Natural Killer Cell Line Compositions and Methods-of-Use;

• Treatment of Viral and Bacterial Diseases using Natural Killer Cell Lines;

• Methods for Expansion, Cryopreservation and Commercial Manufacture; and

As for the NK cell-based immunotherapy products and processes we develop and commercialize, in the normal course of business, we intend to pursue, when possible, composition, method of use, dosing and formulation patent protection. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and drug development processes and technology. The patents and patent applications outside of the U.S. in our portfolio are held primarily in Europe, Canada, Australia, China, Japan and Korea.

Individual patents extend for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance, and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. Generally, patents issued for applications filed in the U.S. are effective for 20years from the earliest effective filing date. The patent term may be adjusted to compensate for delayed patent issuance, when such delays are caused by the patent office or successful appeals against patent office actions. There is no limit on this patent term adjustment. In addition, in certain instances, a patent term can be extended to recapture a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period. The restoration period cannot be longer than fiveyears and the total patent term, including the restoration period, must not exceed 14years following FDA approval. The duration of patents outside of the U.S. varies in accordance with provisions of applicable local law, but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. Our issued patents are anticipated to expire at varying intervals through 2039. If patents are issued on our pending patent applications, the resulting patents are projected to expire at various dates through 2040. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country, and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

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

As of December 31, 2020, our worldwide trademark portfolio was comprised of (i) 12 U.S. trademark registrations; (ii) two pending U.S. trademark application; (iii) 28 foreign trademark registrations, six of which are Madrid Protocol International registrations; and (iv) 24 pending foreign trademark applications.

We may also rely, in some circumstances, on trade secrets to protect our technology. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We seek to protect our technology and product candidates, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with those who have access to our confidential information, including our employees, contractors, consultants, collaborators, and advisors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our proprietary technology and processes by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. Although we have confidence in these individuals, organizations, and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or may be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our employees, contractors, consultants, collaborators, and advisors use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. For risks related to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements and products, please see Part I, Item 1A, “Risk Factors – Risks Related to Intellectual Property” and “Legal Proceedings” of this Annual Report.

Collaboration Agreements

Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration Agreement. As discussed above, on August 21, 2020, we entered into a definitive agreement, which we refer to as the Collaboration Agreement, with ImmunityBio to pursue collaborative joint development, manufacturing and marketing of certain COVID‐19 therapeutics and vaccines.

Cost Sharing Agreement. In January 2020, but effective on October 1, 2019, we entered into a Cost Allocation Agreement with ImmunityBio and its subsidiaries to co-sponsor and conduct certain combination clinical trials (each a Joint Study) pursuant to clinical trial protocols wherein at least one investigational agent is a proprietary therapeutic drug candidate owned or controlled by NantKwest and at least one other investigational agent is a proprietary therapeutic drug candidate owned or controlled by ImmunityBio. Prior to initiating any activities for a Joint Study the parties agreed to enter into written work orders describing, amongst other things, development and management responsibilities, allocation of Joint Study costs and expenses, regulatory responsibilities, and any other matters relating to the Joint Study.

Under the Cost Allocation Agreement, each of ImmunityBio and the company will receive exclusive rights to any new intellectual property developed that relates solely to its respective study drug, and the parties will have joint co-equal rights in any other intellectual property. The Cost Allocation Agreement expires on June 22, 2022 with the option to renew for additional successive one-year terms, but work orders for any joint studies still in process at the time of termination will continue until the applicable study is completed.

We and ImmunityBio are splitting certain costs related to these joint studies equally in accordance with the terms of the Cost Allocation Agreement and related work orders. Shared Joint Study costs include cost related to conducting the Joint Study development activities, such as personnel related costs, as well as all costs associated with regulatory matters. Costs and expenses incurred in connection with the development, manufacturing, supply, delivery, and pre-patient administration dosing mechanism of each party’s study drug, are excluded from the shared Joint Study costs.

In January 2020, but effective on October 1, 2019, we executed Work Order Number One with ImmunityBio, pursuant to the Cost Allocation Agreement. Under Work Order Number One, the parties are conducting a clinical trial pursuant to the protocol titled QUILT 3.063: A phase 2 study of combination therapy with an IL‐15 superagonist (N‐803), off-the-shelf CD16‐targeted natural killer cells (haNK), and avelumab without cytotoxic chemotherapy in subjects with Merkel Cell Carcinoma (MCC) that has progressed on or after treatment with a checkpoint inhibitor. The ImmunityBio study drug included in this Joint Study is ImmunityBio’s proprietary IL‐15 superagonist known as N‐803, and our study drug is our proprietary “off-the-shelf” CD16-targeted natural killer cell therapy known as haNK. We are the sponsor of this Joint Study for purposes of regulatory matters, including submissions, correspondence, and communications. Additionally, we are designated as the contracting party to execute agreements with third and related parties relating to the Joint Study.

In July 2020, but effective on June 22, 2020, we executed Work Order Number Two with ImmunityBio, pursuant to the Cost Allocation Agreement. Under Work Order Number Two, the parties are conducting a clinical trial pursuant to the protocol titled QUILT 88: Open-label, randomized, comparative phase 2 study of combination immunotherapy with standard-of-care chemotherapy versus standard-of-care chemotherapy for first and second line treatment of locally or advanced metastatic pancreatic cancer. The ImmunityBio study drugs included in the joint study are ImmunityBio’s proprietary IL‐15 superagonist (N‐803) and Aldoxorubicin Hydrochloride (Aldoxorubicin), and our study drug is PD‐L1.t‐haNK. ImmunityBio is the sponsor of this Joint Study for purposes of regulatory matters, including submissions, correspondence, and communications with the FDA. Additionally, ImmunityBio is designated as the contracting party to execute agreements with third and related parties relating to this Joint Study.

Licenses

Viracta Therapeutics, Inc. In May 2017, we entered into an agreement with Viracta Therapeutics, Inc., or Viracta, to grant us exclusive worldwide rights to Viracta’s phase II drug candidate, VRx‐3996, for use in combination with our platform of NK cell therapies. In consideration for the license, we are obligated to pay to Viracta (i) mid-single digit percentage royalties of net sales of licensed products for therapeutic use, and (ii) milestone payments ranging from $10.0 million to $25.0 million for various regulatory approvals and cumulative net sales levels. We may terminate the agreement, in our sole discretion, in whole or on a product-by-product and/or country by country basis, at any time upon 90 days’ prior written notice. In addition, either party may terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach or for bankruptcy of the other party.

Hans G. Klingemann, M.D., Ph.D.We hold the worldwide rights, title and interest to the NK‐92 cell line, and we believe that we control commercial use of our NK‐92 cells in key territories. We also maintain and exclusively control the only clinical grade master cell bank for NK‐92. The original NK‐92 cell line was isolated by Hans G. Klingemann, M.D., Ph.D., our founder and Vice President of Research and Development, and all patents and patent applications pertaining to this cell line are now in the name of NantKwest, Inc. or ZelleRx Corporation, our former name. In February2003, we obtained an exclusive, worldwide license from Dr. Klingemann to the NK‐92 cell line, and related NK‐92 patents and know-how, that had been assigned to him by the British Columbia Cancer Agency, to manufacture, use and sell products covered by the scope of any valid claim in any of the licensed patents. Dr. Klingemann subsequently assigned the cell line and those patents to us, but we are still obligated to pay a single-digit royalty on sales of licensed products to Dr. Klingemann, as well as to pay the British Columbia Cancer Agency a small percentage of our profits from the sale of the NK‐92 cell line that Dr. Klingemann obtained from them.

Fox Chase Cancer Center. In July 2004, we entered into an exclusive license agreement with Fox Chase Cancer Center, or Fox Chase, pursuant to which we were granted an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license under certain patents and know-how pertaining to CD16 receptors-bearing NK‐92 cell lines. We agreed to pay Fox Chase low single-digit royalties on sales of licensed products. We are also obligated to pay Fox Chase a percentage of the royalties and other compensation we receive from sublicensees of our rights from Fox Chase. Fox Chase is obligated to assign the licensed patents to us if we commence a phase III clinical trial of a licensed product and, if this does not occur, our license expires when the last of the licensed patents expires. In late May 2020, we received a letter from Fox Chase alleging breaches of our license. If the letter is found to be a proper notice of termination and the alleged breaches are confirmed and found to be material, we will lose the licensed rights. We do not consider these licensed rights to be material.

Rush University Medical Center. In March 2004, we entered into a license agreement with Rush University Medical Center, pursuant to which Rush University Medical Center granted us an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license to certain intellectual property related to clinical use of NK‐92 to develop and commercialize products and processes for the treatment of melanoma and renal cancer, or for the diagnosis or treatment of non-melanoma and non-renal cancer. In consideration for the license, we were obligated to pay to Rush University Medical Center single-digit royalties on sales of licensed products with a minimum royalty payment of $25,000 per year for 12 years. The agreement also provided for payments upon completion of certain clinical, regulatory and commercialization milestones. We also agreed to pay to Rush University Medical Center a portion of certain payments that we receive under sublicensing arrangements. The license had a term of 12 years from 2006, the year in which royalty payments were first made, and included customary termination rights for both parties. Beginning in 2018, this license converted to a perpetual, irrevocable, fully paid royalty-free, exclusive license.

University Health Network. In May 2005, we entered into a license agreement with University Health Network, or UHN, pursuant to which we obtained from UHN an exclusive, worldwide, sublicensable license to certain intellectual property relating to NK‐92 clinical trials data from UHN to develop and commercialize products and processes for the diagnosis and treatment of certain hematological malignancies. Our license from UHN will automatically expire if we have not filed for regulatory approval or launched a licensed product within specified periods of time, and also includes other customary termination rights for both parties.

Joint Development and License Agreements

Precigen Corporation, Inc. (formerly known as Intrexon Corporation). In February 2010, we entered into a 17‐year agreement with Precigen Corporation, Inc., or Precigen, pursuant to which we granted to Precigen a worldwide, sublicensable license which may be exclusive with respect to certain indications designated by Precigen, under certain patents relating to NK‐92 cells to develop and commercialize modified NK‐92 cells that express Precigen’s proprietary gene sequences for use as therapeutic and prophylactic agents in humans in specified therapeutic areas. Precigen paid us a one-time license fee and is also obligated to pay non-material milestone payments with respect to specific indications, a royalty on net sales of the licensed products and a portion of the revenue Precigen receives from third party sublicensees of its rights from us. Precigen has the right to terminate the agreement upon 180 days’ notice and both parties have the right to terminate the agreement for the other’s uncured breach of the agreement.

We have licensed or sub-licensed our cell lines and intellectual property to numerous other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for non-clinical uses such as laboratory testing. Such licenses generally require the licensee to pay an upfront fee and annual research and commercial fees for products sold using our intellectual property and cell lines.

Supply Agreements

We have, and expect that we will continue, to enter into supply agreements with third parties and related parties to provide investigational agents to be used in our clinical trials.

Anticipated Agreements and Considerations

In addition to the collaboration and license agreements discussed above, we may enter into a commercial agreement relating to an IL‐15 superagonist product developed by ImmunityBio, if the proposed merger with ImmunityBio is not consummated, and we are also pursuing certain strategic research and/or license agreements with third parties to develop our product candidate pipeline. These types of agreements do not typically specify how sales will be apportioned between the parties upon successful commercialization of the product. As a result, we cannot guarantee that we will receive a percentage of the revenue that is at least proportional to the costs that we will incur in commercializing the product candidate. Furthermore, if Dr. Soon-Shiong was to cease his affiliation with us or with NantWorks, any affiliated entities may be unwilling to continue their relationships with us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, which in turn may impede our ability to control the supply chain for our combination therapies.

Government Regulation

The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state, and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring, and post-approval reporting of biologics such as those we are developing. We, along with third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of our product candidates. 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.

The process required by the FDA before biologic product candidates may be marketed in the U.S. generally involves the following:

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

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for our product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, if at all. Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate, we must submit an IND to the FDA. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical studies. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product; chemistry, manufacturing, and controls information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational product. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30‐day time period, raises safety concerns or questions about the proposed clinical trial. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial.

When a clinical trial using genetically engineered cells is conducted at, or sponsored by, institutions receiving National Institutes of Health, or NIH, funding for recombinant DNA research, prior to the submission of an IND to the FDA, a protocol and related documentation is submitted to and the study is registered with the NIH Office of Biotechnology Activities, or OBA, pursuant to the NIH Guidelines for Research Involving Recombinant DNA Molecules, or NIH Guidelines. Compliance with the NIH Guidelines is mandatory for investigators at institutions receiving NIH funds for research involving recombinant DNA, and many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them. The NIH is responsible for convening the Recombinant DNA Advisory Committee, or RAC, a federal advisory committee that discusses protocols that raise novel or particularly important scientific, safety, or ethical considerations at one of its quarterly public meetings. The OBA will notify the FDA of the RAC’s decision regarding the necessity for full public review of a protocol. RAC proceedings and reports are posted to the OBA web site and may be accessed by the public. If the FDA allows the IND to proceed, but the RAC decides that full public review of the protocol is warranted, the FDA will request at the completion of its IND review that sponsors delay initiation of the protocol until after completion of the RAC review process.

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with cGCPs, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the study, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. Furthermore, an independent IRB, for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the study until completed. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and clinical study results to public registries.

For purposes of BLA approval, human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap.

Phase I, phase II and phase III testing may not be completed successfully within a specified period, if at all, and there can be no assurance that the data collected will support FDA approval or licensure of the product. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. To help reduce the risk of the introduction of adventitious agents with use of biological products, the Public Health Service Act, or 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, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life.

Further, as a result of the COVID‐19 pandemic, we may be required to develop and implement additional clinical trial policies and procedures designed to help protect subjects from the COVID‐19 virus. For example, the FDA has issued guidance on conducting clinical trials during the pandemic, which describes a number of considerations for sponsors of clinical trials impacted by the pandemic, including certain reporting requirements, and additional guidance on GMP considerations for responding to COVID‐19 infection and other topics. We may be required to make further adjustments to our clinical trials or business operations based on current or future guidance and regulatory requirements as a result of the COVID‐19 pandemic.

BLA Submission and Review by the FDA

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of a BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The BLA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical and clinical studies, including negative or ambiguous results, as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of the product or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. The submission of a BLA requires payment of a substantial user fee to the FDA, and the sponsor of an approved BLA is subject to annual product and establishment user fees. These fees typically increase annually. A waiver of user fees may be obtained under certain limited circumstances.

Within 60 days following submission of the application, the FDA reviews a BLA to determine if it is substantially complete before the agency accepts it for filing. The FDA may refuse to file any BLA that it deems incomplete or not properly reviewable at the time of submission and may request additional information. In this event, the BLA must be resubmitted with the additional information. Once a BLA has been filed, the FDA’s goal is to review the application within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application relates to an unmet medical need in a serious or life-threatening indication, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. The review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews a BLA to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed, or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities comply with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. FDA regulations also require tissue establishments to register and list their HCT/Ps with the FDA and, when applicable, to evaluate donors through screening and testing. Additionally, before approving a BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with cGCP. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval.

The testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and each may take several years to complete. The FDA may not grant approval on a timely basis, or at all, and we may encounter difficulties or unanticipated costs in our efforts to secure necessary governmental approvals, which could delay or preclude us from marketing our products. After the FDA evaluates a BLA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities where the investigational product and/or its drug substance will be produced, the FDA may issue an approval letter, a complete response letter, or a not approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A complete response letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application is not ready for approval. A complete response letter may request additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of a BLA if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product.

If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may approve the BLA with a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, plan to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans, or other restrictions to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing regulatory standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more phase IV post-market studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing studies. In addition, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our products under development.

A sponsor may seek approval of its product candidate under programs designed to accelerate the FDA’s review and approval of new drugs and biological products that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs and biological products are eligible for fast track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. For a fast track product, the FDA may consider sections of the BLA for review on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted if relevant criteria are met. A fast track designated product candidate may also qualify for priority review, under which the FDA sets the target date for FDA action on the BLA at sixmonths after the FDA accepts the application for filing. Priority review is granted when there is evidence that the proposed product would be a significant improvement in the safety or effectiveness of the treatment, diagnosis, or prevention of a serious condition. If criteria are not met for priority review, the application is subject to the standard FDA review period of tenmonths after the FDA accepts the application for filing. Priority review designation does not change the scientific/medical standard for approval or the quality of evidence necessary to support approval.

Under the accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a BLA on the basis of either a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Post-marketing studies or completion of ongoing studies after marketing approval are generally required to verify the biologic’s clinical benefit in relationship to the surrogate endpoint or ultimate outcome in relationship to the clinical benefit. In addition, the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act, or FDASIA, which was enacted and signed into law in 2012, established breakthrough therapy designation. A sponsor may seek FDA designation of its product candidate as a breakthrough therapy if the product candidate is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the therapy may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Sponsors may request the FDA to designate a breakthrough therapy at the time of, or any time after, the submission of an IND, but ideally before an end-of-phase II meeting with the FDA. If the FDA designates a breakthrough therapy, it may take actions appropriate to expedite the development and review of the application, which may include holding meetings with the sponsor and the review team throughout the development of the therapy; providing timely advice to, and interactive communication with, the sponsor regarding the development of the drug to ensure that the development program to gather the nonclinical and clinical data necessary for approval is as efficient as practicable; involving senior managers and experienced review staff, as appropriate, in a collaborative, cross-disciplinary review; assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the FDA review team to facilitate an efficient review of the development program and to serve as a scientific liaison between the review team and the sponsor; and considering alternative clinical trial designs when scientifically appropriate, which may result in smaller or more efficient clinical trials that require less time to complete and may minimize the number of patients exposed to a potentially less efficacious treatment. Breakthrough designation also allows the sponsor to file sections of the BLA for review on a rolling basis. We may seek designation as a breakthrough therapy for some or all of our product candidates.

Fast track designation, priority review and breakthrough therapy designation do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Orphan Drugs

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 U.S., or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the U.S. will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that drug or biologic. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA. 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 exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full BLA, to market the same biologic for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the 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 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 U.S. may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Post-Approval Requirements

Any products manufactured or distributed by us pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to record keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual user fee requirements for any marketed products and the establishments at which such products are manufactured, as well as new application fees for supplemental applications with clinical data. Biologic manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon us and any third-party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements upon us, and any third party manufacturers, that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance. We cannot be certain that we or our present or future suppliers will be able to comply with the cGMP regulations and other FDA regulatory requirements. If our present or future suppliers are not able to comply with these requirements, the FDA may, among other things, halt our clinical trials, require us to recall a product from distribution, or withdraw approval of the BLA.

Future FDA and state inspections may identify compliance issues at our facilities or at the facilities of contract manufacturers that may disrupt production or distribution, or require substantial resources to correct. In addition, discovery of previously unknown problems with a product or the failure to comply with applicable requirements may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer or holder of an approved BLA, including withdrawal or recall of the product from the market or other voluntary, FDA-initiated or judicial action that could delay or prohibit further marketing.

The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information; imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things:

• fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical studies;

• injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biologics. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties, and exclusion from participation in governmental health programs, like Medicare and Medicaid. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those tested by us and approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

Our sales, promotion, medical education, clinical research and other activities following product approval will be subject to regulation by numerous regulatory and law enforcement authorities in the U.S. in addition to the FDA, including potentially the Federal Trade Commission, the Department of Justice, the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and state and local governments. Our promotional and scientific/educational programs must comply with the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the False Claims Act, physician payment transparency laws, privacy laws, security laws, and additional federal and state laws similar to the foregoing.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, the knowing and willing, direct or indirect offer, receipt, solicitation or payment of remuneration in exchange for or to induce the referral of patients, including the purchase, order or lease of any good, facility, item or service that would be paid for in whole or part by Medicare, Medicaid or other federal health care programs. Remuneration has been broadly defined to include anything of value, including cash, improper discounts, and free or reduced price items and services. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, formulary managers, and beneficiaries on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly. 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 exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the federal Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all its facts and circumstances. Several courts have interpreted the statute’s intent requirement to mean that if any one purpose of an arrangement involving remuneration is to induce referrals of federal healthcare covered business, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been violated. The government has enforced the federal Anti-Kickback Statute to reach large settlements with healthcare companies based on sham research or consulting and other financial arrangements with physicians. Further, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act. Many states have similar laws that apply to their state health care programs, as well as private payors.

Federal false claims and false statement laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, or FCA, imposes liability on persons or entities that, among other things, knowingly present or cause to be presented claims that are false or fraudulent or not provided as claimed for payment or approval by a federal health care program. The FCA has been used to prosecute persons or entities that “cause” the submission of claims for payment that are inaccurate or fraudulent, by, for example, providing inaccurate billing or coding information to customers, promoting a product off-label, submitting claims for services not provided as claimed, or submitting claims for services that were provided but not medically necessary. Actions under the FCA may be brought by the Attorney General, or as a qui tam action by a private individual, in the name of the government. Violations of the FCA can result in significant monetary penalties and treble damages. The federal government is using the FCA, and the accompanying threat of significant liability, in its investigation and prosecution of pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies throughout the country, for example, in connection with the promotion of products for unapproved uses and other illegal sales and marketing practices. The government has obtained multi-million and multi-billion dollar settlements under the FCA in addition to individual criminal convictions under applicable criminal statutes. In addition, certain companies that were found to be in violation of the FCA have been forced to implement extensive corrective action plans and have often become subject to consent decrees or corporate integrity agreements, restricting the manner in which they conduct their business.

The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors; knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up 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; and willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense. Like the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the Affordable Care Act amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation.

Given the significant size of actual and potential settlements, it is expected that the government will continue to devote substantial resources to investigating healthcare providers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with applicable fraud and abuse laws. In addition, many states have similar fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that may be broader in scope and may apply regardless of payor, in addition to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs. Additionally, to the extent that our products, once commercialized, are sold in a foreign country, we may be subject to similar foreign laws.

In addition, there has been a recent trend of increased federal and state regulation of payments made to physicians and other healthcare providers. The Physician Payment Sunshine Act, or the Sunshine Act, enacted as part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act, among other things, imposed new reporting requirements on certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, for payments and other transfers of value made by them to physicians and teaching hospitals, as defined by law, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Effective January1, 2022, these annual reporting obligations will extend to include payments and transfers of value made during the previous year to certain non-physician covered recipients, such as physician assistants, nurse practitioners, clinical nurse specialists, certified registered nurse anesthetists, anesthesiologist assistants, and certified nurse-midwives. Covered manufacturers are required to collect and report detailed payment data and submit legal attestation to the accuracy of such data to the government each year. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties of up to an aggregate of $176,495per year (or up to an aggregate of $1,176,638per year for “knowing failures”), subject to adjustment for inflation, for all payments, transfers of value or ownership or investment interests that are not timely, accurately and completely reported in an annual submission. Additionally, entities that do not comply with mandatory reporting requirements may be subject to a corporate integrity agreement. Non-compliance under the Sunshine Act may increase government scrutiny and increase liability under other healthcare laws. Certain states also mandate implementation of commercial compliance programs, impose restrictions on covered manufacturers’ marketing practices and/or require the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensation and other remuneration to physicians and other healthcare professionals.

We may also be subject to data privacy and security regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, imposes specified requirements on certain health care providers, plans and clearinghouses (collectively, “covered entities”) and their “business associates,” relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s security standards directly applicable to “business associates,” defined as independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain or transmit protected health information in connection with providing a service for or on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, certain states have their own laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other and/or HIPAA in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, and diminished profits and future earnings, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results.

In addition to the foregoing health care laws, we are also subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, and similar worldwide anti-bribery laws, which generally prohibit companies and their intermediaries from making improper payments to government officials or private-sector recipients for the purpose of obtaining or retaining business. We also maintain an anti-corruption policy which mandates compliance with the FCPA and similar anti-bribery laws applicable to our business throughout the world. However, we cannot assure you that such a policy, or procedures implemented to enforce such a policy, will protect us from intentional, reckless or negligent acts committed by our employees, distributors, partners, collaborators or agents. Violations of these laws, or allegations of such violations, could result in fines, penalties or prosecution and have a negative impact on our business, results of operations and reputation.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of pharmaceutical products depend significantly on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement are provided by third-party payors. Third-party payors include state and federal government health care programs, managed care providers, private health insurers and other organizations. Although we currently believe that third-party payors will provide coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved, we cannot be certain of this. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the cost-effectiveness, and reducing reimbursement for medical products and services. In addition, significant uncertainty exists as to the reimbursement status of newly approved healthcare products. The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost containment measures and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures could further limit our net revenue and results. We may need to conduct expensive clinical studies to demonstrate the comparative cost-effectiveness of our products. The product candidates that we develop may not be considered cost-effective and thus may not be covered or

sufficiently reimbursed. It is time consuming and expensive for us to seek coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors, as each payor will make its own determination as to whether to cover a product and at what level of reimbursement. Thus, one payor’s decision to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement for a product does not assure that another payor will provide coverage or that the reimbursement levels will be adequate. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Reimbursement may not be available or sufficient to allow us to sell our products on a competitive and profitable basis.

Healthcare Reform

The U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions are considering or have enacted a number of legislative and regulatory proposals to change the healthcare system in ways that could affect our ability to sell our products profitably. Among policy makers and payors in the U.S. and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the U.S., the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives.

By way of example, in March 2010, the Affordable Care Act was signed into law, intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our potential drug candidates are:

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes include, among others, the Budget Control Act of 2011, which mandates aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year effective April 1, 2013, and, will remain in effect through 2030, with the exception of a temporary suspension implemented under various COVID‐19 relief legislation from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021, unless additional Congressional action is taken. The American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. These new laws may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our product candidates, if approved, and, accordingly, our financial operations.

We expect that the Affordable Care Act, as well as other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and lower reimbursement and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government-funded programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our drugs. Furthermore, the current presidential administration and Congress may continue to attempt broad sweeping changes to the current health care laws.We face uncertainties that might result from modifications or repeal of any of the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, including as a result of current and future executive orders and legislative actions.The impact of those changes on us and potential effect on the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries as a whole is currently unknown.However, any changes to the Affordable Care Act are likely to have an impact on our results of operations and may have a material adverse effect on our results of operations.We cannot predict what other healthcare programs and regulations will ultimately be implemented at the federal or state level or the effect any future legislation or regulation in the U.S. may have on our business.

Foreign Regulation

In addition to regulations in the U.S., we will be subject to a variety of foreign regulations governing clinical trials and commercial sales and distribution of our products to the extent we choose to develop or sell any products outside of the U.S. The approval process varies from country to country and the time may be longer or shorter than that required to obtain FDA approval. The requirements governing the conduct of clinical trials, product licensing, pricing and reimbursement vary greatly from country to country.

Employees

As of December 31, 2020, we had 171 employees. Among our employees, 23% are focused on research and development, 8% on clinical development and regulatory, 51% on manufacturing and quality, and 18% on general and administrative functions. Personnel of related companies who provide corporate, general and administrative, manufacturing strategy, research and development, regulatory and clinical trial strategy and other administrative support services under our shared services agreement with NantWorks are not included in this number. For additional information, see Note 10, Related Party Agreements, of the “Notes to Consolidated Financial Statements” included in Part II, Item 8 of this Annual Report. We believe our ability to successfully achieve our vision depends on how effectively we manage our growth. Our leadership is focused on continuing to implement and improve our management systems, recruit and train new employees and cultivate and retain our existing team members. Our employees are a highly unique group of individuals across our drug discovery, preclinical development, clinical operations, regulatory affairs, manufacturing and quality, and executive leadership teams with deep experience in biotech across a breadth of novel scientific areas. We offer competitive compensation and benefits to all employees, as well as a host of other programs that enhance employee well-being in and outside of the workplace. We believe we have a positive relationship with our employees, and none of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered by collective bargaining agreements.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated on October 7, 2002 in the state of Illinois under the name ZelleRx Corporation. On January 22, 2010, we changed our name to Conkwest, Inc. In March 2014, we formed Conkwest, Inc., our wholly owned subsidiary in the state of Delaware, or Conkwest Delaware, for the purposes of changing the state of our incorporation to the state of Delaware. In March 2014, we merged with and into Conkwest Delaware, with Conkwest Delaware surviving the merger. On July 10, 2015, we changed our name to NantKwest, Inc. Our website address is www.nantkwest.com. The contents of our website are not incorporated by reference into this Form 10‐K. We provide free of charge through a link on our website access to our Annual Reports on Form 10‐K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10‐Q and Current Reports on Form 8‐K, as well as amendments to those reports, as soon as reasonably practical after the reports are electronically filed with, or furnished to, the Securities and Exchange Commission.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks described below, as well as other information included in this Annual Report on Form 10‐K, or Annual Report, including our financial statements and the related notes, and the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” any of which may be relevant to decisions regarding an investment in or ownership of our stock. The occurrence of any of these risks could have a significant adverse effect on our reputation, business, financial condition, results of operations, growth and ability to accomplish our strategic objectives. We have organized the description of these risks into groupings in an effort to enhance readability, but many of the risks interrelate or could be grouped or ordered in other ways, so no special significance should be attributed to the groupings or order below.

Risk Factor Summary

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements:

Risks Relating to Our Business and Industry:

Risks Relating to Government Regulation:

Risks Relating to Our Intellectual Property:

Risks Relating to our Proposed Merger with ImmunityBio

• We may suffer negative consequences if the proposed merger is not completed.

Risks Relating to Our Common Stock:

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history and have incurred significant losses since our inception, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, which makes it difficult to assess our future viability.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history upon which our business can be evaluated. To date, we have generated minimal revenue related to the non-clinical use of our cell lines and intellectual property, and we have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales. We have incurred operating losses on an annual basis since our formation and we may never become profitable. As of December 31, 2020, we had an accumulated deficit of $754.6 million. We incurred net losses of $92.4 million, $65.8 million, and $96.2 million for the years ended December 31, 2020, 2019 and 2018, respectively. Our losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in ongoing preclinical studies, clinical trials and operations, as well as other research and development expenses, and general and administrative expenses.

A critical aspect of our strategy is to invest significantly in expanding our haNK, taNK, t‐haNK, MSC and ceNK platforms and the development of our product candidates. We expect to incur significant expenses as we continue to expand our business, including in connection with conducting research and development across multiple therapeutic areas, participating in clinical trial activities, continuing to acquire or in-license technologies, maintaining, protecting and expanding our intellectual property, seeking regulatory approvals and, upon successful receipt of U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, approval, commercializing our products. We will also incur costs as we hire additional personnel and increase our manufacturing capabilities, including the lease or purchase of a facility for the manufacturing of our product candidates for our ongoing and any future clinical trials and, upon receipt of any FDA approval, for our initial commercialization activities. Moreover, we do not expect to have any significant product sales or revenue for at least the next several years. These losses have had and, as our operating losses continue to increase significantly in the future due to these expenditures, will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with our product development efforts, we are unable to predict when we may become profitable, if at all. Additionally, our net losses may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter, and as a result, a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be meaningful. For example, we expect our operating expenses to continue to increase in the year ended December 31, 2021, due to increased research and development expenses including personnel related costs and capital and facility operating expenditures in continued efforts for our Joint COVID‐19 Collaboration with ImmunityBio. Additionally, we also expect to incur increased costs associated with our proposed merger with ImmunityBio. Even if we do become profitable, we may not be able to sustain or increase our profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. In addition, we expect increased expenses in future quarters as a result of the Joint COVID-19 Collaboration.

We do not have any therapeutic products that are approved for commercial sale. Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve and maintain profitability depends significantly on our success in a number of factors.

We currently do not have any therapeutic products that are approved for commercial sale. We have not received, and do not expect to receive for at least the next several years, if at all, any revenues from the commercialization of our product candidates if approved. To obtain revenue from sales of our product candidates that are significant or large enough to achieve profitability, we must succeed, either alone or with third or related parties, in developing, obtaining regulatory approval for, manufacturing and marketing therapies with commercial potential. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve and maintain profitability depends significantly on our success in many areas, including:

• defending against third-party interference or infringement claims, if any; and

• attracting, hiring and retaining qualified personnel.

Even if one or more of our product candidates is eventually approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate and we may not generate significant revenue from sales of such products, resulting in limited or no profitability in the future. Our prior losses and expected future losses have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital for the foreseeable future. Any failure to become and remain profitable may adversely affect the market price of our common stock, our ability to raise additional capital and our future viability.

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

Since our inception, we have used substantial amounts of cash to fund our operations and expect our expenses to increase substantially in the foreseeable future. Developing our product candidates and conducting clinical trials for the treatment of cancer, virally infectious diseases, and other diseases requires substantial amounts of capital. We will also require a significant additional amount of capital to commercialize any approved products.

As of December 31, 2020, we had cash and cash equivalents of $11.4 million and marketable debt securities of $54.8 million. We are using and expect to continue to use our existing cash and cash equivalents and marketable debt securities to fund expenses in connection with our ongoing and any future clinical trials, our manufacturing facilities and processes and the hiring of additional personnel, and for other research and development activities, working capital and general corporate purposes, including our previously announced share repurchase program. As a result of continuing anticipated operating cash outflows, we believe that substantial doubt exists regarding our ability to continue as a going concern without additional funding or financial support. However, we believe our existing cash, cash equivalents, and investments in marketable debt securities, and our ability to borrow from affiliated entities, will be sufficient to fund operations through at least the next 12 months following the issuance date of the financial statements based primarily upon our Executive Chairman’s intent and ability to support our operations with additional funds, including loans from affiliated entities, as required, which we believe alleviates such doubt. Our estimate as to how long we expect our existing cash and cash equivalents to be available to fund our operations is based on assumptions that may be proved inaccurate, and we could deplete our available capital resources sooner than we currently expect. In addition, changing circumstances, including the completion of the proposed merger with ImmunityBio, may cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to spend more money than currently expected because of circumstances beyond our control. We may require additional capital for the further development and any commercialization of our product candidates and may need to raise additional funds sooner than we anticipate if we choose to expand more rapidly.

Our future capital requirements may depend on, and could increase significantly as a result of, many factors, including:

• the degree and rate of market acceptance of any approved products;

• the expenses needed to attract and retain skilled personnel;

• the costs associated with being a public company;

• the costs associated with our proposed merger with ImmunityBio;

• the costs related to commercializing product candidates independently;

IBRX US Equity

IBRX · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item 1. Business.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

IBRX US Equity☆

IBRX · 10-K · period ended 2020-12-31

Item 1. Business.

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

IBRX US Equity