KOD US Equity☆

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

You should consider carefully the following risk factors, together with all the other information in this report, including the section of this report titled “Part II, Item 7 — Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and our consolidated financial statements and notes thereto. The occurrence of any events described in the following risk factors and the risks described elsewhere in this report could harm our business, operating results, financial condition or growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements that we have made in this report and that we may make from time to time. You should consider all of the risk factors described when evaluating our business. The risks described below are not intended to be exhaustive and are not the only risks that we face. New risk factors can emerge from time to time, and it is not possible to predict the impact that any factor or combination of factors may have on our business, operating results, financial condition, and/or growth prospects.

Risks Related to the Discovery, Development and Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

We are in the clinical stage of drug development and have a limited operating history and no products approved for commercial sale, which may make it difficult to evaluate our current business and predict our future success and viability.

We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company committed to researching, developing and commercializing transformative therapeutics to treat a broad spectrum of retinal diseases. We commenced operations in June 2009, have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue. Drug development is a highly uncertain undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We have conducted clinical trials, including Phase 3 pivotal clinical trials, of tarcocimab in patients with wet AMD, DME, DR and RVO. We completed enrollment for the Phase 3 DAYBREAK clinical trial of tarcocimab and KSI-501 in patients with wet AMD. We are continuing enrollment for the on-going Phase 3 PEAK and PINNACLE clinical trials of KSI-101 in patients with MESI.

To date, we have not obtained marketing approval for any of our product candidates or conducted sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our limited operating history as a company and stage of drug development make any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by biopharmaceutical companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficulties successfully, our business will suffer.

Our prospects are heavily dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101, our product candidates, which are currently in clinical development for multiple indications.

Our prospects are heavily dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101, our product candidates. We cannot be certain that our product candidates will be successful in any of the planned or pending clinical trials.

Our previous clinical trial results are not necessarily predictive of the results of our on-going or future discovery programs or any future preclinical or clinical studies. Our ability to demonstrate efficacy, safety and/or clinical durability in pivotal studies may be affected by the patient populations sampled and the design of our pivotal studies. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical studies after achieving positive results in previous clinical studies, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical studies were underway or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical studies, including previously unreported or unobserved adverse events as more patients are treated and followed for longer periods of time.

For example, in our Phase 2b/3 DAZZLE clinical trial evaluating the efficacy, durability and safety of tarcocimab in treatment-naïve subjects with neovascular wet AMD and in our Phase 3 GLEAM and GLIMMER studies, tarcocimab did not meet the primary efficacy endpoint of showing non-inferior visual acuity gains.

There can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical studies of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in study procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the clinical study protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical study participants. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical studies nonetheless failed to obtain FDA approval. We have never submitted a BLA, and even if GLOW1, GLOW2, BEACON, DAYLIGHT or DAYBREAK clinical data support submission of a tarcocimab BLA to the FDA in 2026, we may need to delay submission which would delay review and potential approval. If approved, clinical study designs and data are not necessarily predictive of the final marketed product label. FDA may not approve a label for a particular dosing frequency, even if we believe the data demonstrate support for that dosing. For example, our DAYBREAK trial uses an AI-based tool to

19

measure retinal fluid and individualize dosing, and this dosing may not be incorporated into labeling or may require separate FDA review of the AI-based tool.

We may in the future develop other product candidates, advance additional product candidates into clinical trials and terminate such trials prior to their completion. It will take additional investment and time for such programs to reach the same stage of development as tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101.

The failure of pivotal studies to meet their primary efficacy endpoints may lead us to pause, change or discontinue development of other product candidates based on our ABC Platform.

In July 2023, we announced that the Phase 3 GLEAM and GLIMMER clinical trials of tarcocimab did not meet their primary efficacy endpoints and, as a result, we paused further development of tarcocimab pending review of Year 1 data from the Phase 3 BEACON study in patients with RVO and the Phase 3 GLOW1 study of patients with DR. Although we resumed the development of tarcocimab in November 2023, we may again determine to discontinue development of tarcocimab or our ABC Platform or other product candidates, including KSI-501, based on future information such as in process or completed clinical trial results, which could prevent us from, or significantly delay, achieving profitability and could result in disruptions to our business including potential impairment charges, restructuring costs, or costs that are greater than expected.

Our plans for the development of tarcocimab, KSI-501 or KSI-101 may be unsuccessful.

We resumed further development of tarcocimab in November 2023 following the outcomes of Year 1 data from the Phase 3 BEACON study in patients with RVO and the Phase 3 GLOW1 study of patients with DR. In connection with our development program, we developed an enhanced, commercial formulation of tarcocimab. While the FDA has advised that the additional clinical studies to be conducted with the revised formulation should be sufficient to bridge the former material to the go-to-market material, we cannot be sure that the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities would agree or accept our planned BLA even if our planned additional trials are successful and, as a result, further development of tarcocimab and KSI-501 may ultimately not be successful.

Preliminary, interim and ongoing data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties and may change as more patient data become available.

We may from time to time have access to certain data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials on a preliminary, interim or ongoing basis. Such data is typically incomplete and is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties. In particular, any analysis of preliminary, interim or ongoing data typically involves only a preliminary analysis of then-available data. The results and related findings and conclusions based on such preliminary analysis may change following a more comprehensive review, evaluation, audit and verification of the data. Further, such preliminary, interim or ongoing data are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available or as patients from our clinical trials continue other treatments. We may also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of any analyses of these data, without the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate complete data. As a result, the preliminary, interim or ongoing data from any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials, as well as any analysis of such data and any related findings and conclusions, may differ from, and may not be indicative of, future data, findings and conclusions for the same preclinical studies or clinical trials, and different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results once additional data have been received and fully evaluated or subsequently made subject to audit and verification procedures. We may from time to time make business decisions, prioritize certain product candidates, or otherwise allocate resources based on such preliminary, interim or ongoing data, and any such actions are subject to similar risks and uncertainties.

From time to time, we may also disclose any such preliminary, interim or ongoing data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Any such preliminary, interim or ongoing data are subject to the risks and uncertainties described above, and accordingly investors should not place undue reliance on any such data, or any related findings and conclusions, that we may disclose from time to time. Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses based on any such preliminary, interim or ongoing data, or may interpret or weigh the importance of such data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of tarcocimab, KSI-501 or KSI-101 and our company in general. In addition, any preliminary, interim or ongoing data we may choose to publicly disclose from time to time regarding a particular preclinical study or clinical trial would be based on what is typically extensive information, but may not reflect all of the data we have received. It is possible that investors and others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. If any preliminary, interim or ongoing data, or any related findings or conclusion, that we choose to publicly disclose differ from final results, findings and conclusions for the same preclinical study or clinical trial, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, tarcocimab, KSI-501 or KSI-101 may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition. Conversely, any preliminary or interim information we determine not to publicly disclose, including because it has yet to be fully and carefully evaluated, may in the future be deemed significant with respect to decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product candidate or our business.

20

Research and development of biopharmaceutical products is inherently risky. We cannot give any assurance that any of our product candidates will receive regulatory, including marketing, approval, which is necessary before they can be commercialized.

We are at an early stage of development of our product candidates. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize our product candidates, and we may fail to do so for many reasons, including the following:

•

our product candidates have in the past and may in the future not successfully complete preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•

if a product candidate obtains regulatory approval, approval may be for indications, dosage and administration or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired;

•

a product candidate may, on further study, be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate it is unlikely to be effective or otherwise does not meet applicable regulatory criteria, for example a positive benefit-risk profile;

•

our competitors may develop therapeutics that render our product candidates obsolete or less attractive;

•

our competitors may develop platform technologies that render our ABC Platform obsolete or less attractive;

•

any product candidates and the ABC Platform that we develop may not be sufficiently covered by intellectual property for which we hold exclusive rights or may be covered by third party patents or other intellectual property or exclusive rights;

•

the market for a product candidate may change so that the continued development of that product candidate is no longer commercially attractive;

•

a product candidate may not be capable of being produced in commercial quantities at an acceptable cost, or at all;

•

if a product candidate obtains regulatory approval, we may be unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities, or successfully market such approved product candidate, to gain market acceptance; and

•

a product candidate may not be accepted as safe and effective by patients, the medical community or third-party payors, if applicable.

If any of these events occurs, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a product candidate or candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. Failure of a product candidate may occur at any stage of preclinical or clinical development, and, because our product candidates and our ABC Platform are in development, there is a relatively higher risk of failure and we may never succeed in developing marketable products or generating product revenue.

Further, we may not be successful in our efforts to further develop our product candidates and our ABC Platform in time to meet the current and identified market opportunity. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. Each of our product candidates is in various stages of development and will require significant additional clinical development, management of preclinical, clinical, and manufacturing activities, regulatory approval, adequate manufacturing supply, a commercial organization, and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenue from product sales, if at all. Any clinical studies that we may conduct may not demonstrate the efficacy and safety necessary to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates. If the results of our on-going or future clinical studies are inconclusive with respect to the efficacy of our product candidates or if we do not meet the clinical endpoints with statistical significance or if there are safety concerns or adverse events associated with our product candidates, we may be prevented or delayed in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates.

If any of our product candidates successfully completes clinical trials, we generally plan to seek regulatory approval to market our product candidates in the United States, the EU, and in additional foreign countries where we believe there is a viable commercial opportunity. We have never commenced, compiled or submitted an application seeking regulatory approval to market any product candidate in any jurisdiction. We may never receive regulatory approval to market any product candidate in any jurisdiction even if such product candidate successfully completes clinical trials, which would adversely affect our viability. To obtain regulatory approval in countries outside the United States, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such other countries regarding safety, efficacy, chemistry, manufacturing and controls, clinical trials, commercial sales, pricing, and distribution of our product candidates. We may also rely on our collaborators or partners to conduct the required activities to support an application for regulatory approval, and to seek approval, for one or more of our product candidates. We cannot be sure that our collaborators or partners will conduct these activities successfully or do so within the timeframe we desire. Even if we (or our collaborators or partners) are successful in obtaining approval in

21

one jurisdiction, we cannot ensure that we will obtain approval in any other jurisdictions. If we are unable to obtain approval for our product candidates in multiple jurisdictions, our revenue and results of operations could be negatively affected.

Even if we receive regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, we cannot assure you that any such product candidate will be successfully commercialized, widely accepted in the marketplace or more effective than other commercially available alternatives. That approval may be for indications, dosage and administration or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired or may require labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings. We may also be required to perform additional or unanticipated clinical studies to obtain approval or be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements to maintain regulatory approval. In addition, regulatory authorities may withdraw their approval of a product or impose restrictions on its distribution, such as in the form of a modified REMS. The failure to obtain timely regulatory approval of product candidates, any product marketing limitations or a product withdrawal would negatively impact our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Investment in biopharmaceutical product development involves significant risk that any product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval, and become commercially viable. We cannot provide any assurance that we will be able to successfully advance any of our product candidates through the development process or, if approved, successfully commercialize any of our product candidates.

We may encounter substantial delays in our clinical trials or may not be able to conduct or complete our clinical trials on the timelines we expect, if at all.

Clinical testing is expensive, time consuming, and subject to uncertainty. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. We cannot be sure that submission of an IND application or a clinical trial application, or CTA, will result in the FDA, EMA, or any other regulatory authority as applicable, allowing clinical trials to begin in a timely manner, if at all. Moreover, even if these trials begin, issues may arise that could suspend or terminate such clinical trials. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, and our future clinical trials may not be successful. Events that may prevent successful or timely initiation or completion of clinical trials include:

•

inability to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology, or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation or continuation of clinical trials;

•

delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory agencies on study design;

•

the determination by the reviewing regulatory authority to require more costly or lengthy clinical trials than we currently anticipate;

•

delays in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with clinical trial sites or other third-party vendors, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different clinical trial sites or vendors;

•

delays in identifying, recruiting and training suitable clinical investigators;

•

delays in obtaining required IRB approval at each clinical trial site;

•

imposition of a temporary or permanent clinical hold by regulatory agencies for a number of reasons, including after review of an IND or amendment, CTA or amendment, or equivalent application or amendment; as a result of a new safety finding that presents unreasonable risk to clinical trial participants; a negative finding from an inspection of our clinical trial operations or study sites; developments on trials conducted by competitors for related technology that raises FDA, EMA or any other regulatory authority concerns about risk to patients of the technology broadly; or if the FDA, EMA or any other regulatory authority finds that the investigational protocol or plan is clearly deficient to meet its stated objectives;

•

delays in identifying, recruiting and enrolling suitable patients to participate in our clinical trials, and delays caused by patients withdrawing from clinical trials or failing to return for post-treatment follow-up;

•

difficulty collaborating with patient groups and investigators;

•

failure by third parties or us to adhere to clinical trial requirements;

•

failure to perform in accordance with the FDA’s or any other regulatory authority’s good clinical practices, or GCPs, requirements, or applicable EMA or other regulatory guidelines in other countries;

•

occurrence of adverse events associated with the product candidate that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits;

•

changes in regulatory requirements and guidance that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols;

22

•

changes in the standard of care on which a clinical development plan was based, which may require new or additional trials;

•

the cost of clinical trials of our product candidates being greater than we anticipate;

•

clinical trials of our product candidates producing negative or inconclusive results, which may result in our deciding, or regulators requiring us, to conduct additional clinical trials or abandon development of such product candidates;

•

transfer of manufacturing processes to larger-scale facilities operated by CMOs or by us, and delays or failure by our CMOs or us to make any necessary changes to such manufacturing process; and

•

delays in manufacturing, testing, releasing, validating, or importing/exporting sufficient stable quantities of our product candidates for use in clinical trials and for use in regulatory filings or the inability to do any of the foregoing.

Any inability to successfully initiate or complete clinical trials could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may be required to or we may elect to conduct additional studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the data safety monitoring board for such trial or by the FDA, EMA or any other regulatory authority, or if the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted suspend or terminate the participation of their clinical investigators and sites subject to their review. Regulatory authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. We may also face delays if we are unable to reach agreement with the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities regarding CMC matters, including methodologies for, and assessment of, comparability of manufacturing procedures and lots.

Delays in the commencement, conduct or completion of any clinical trial of our product candidates will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and delay or potentially jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenue. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates.

Our product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could halt their clinical development, prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential or result in other significant negative consequences.

Adverse events or other undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

During the conduct of clinical trials, patients report changes in their health, including illnesses, injuries, and discomforts, to their study doctor. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not the product candidate being studied caused these conditions. It is possible that as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials, or as use of these product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other adverse events that were not observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, will be reported by patients. Many times, side effects are only detectable after investigational products are tested in large-scale Phase 3 clinical trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. If additional clinical experience indicates that any of our product candidates has side effects or causes serious or life-threatening side effects, the development of the product candidate may fail or be delayed, or, if the product candidate has received regulatory approval, such approval may be revoked, which would severely harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. For example, in the tarcocimab arms of our completed GLEAM and GLIMMER clinical trials, we observed an unexpected increase in cataracts, which we believe may have contributed meaningfully to the failure of each study to meet its primary efficacy endpoint.

Our most advanced product candidate, tarcocimab, is an anti-VEGF biologic that we have studied in wet AMD, DME, DR and RVO. Our KSI-501 product candidate is a first-in-class bispecific antibody conjugate designed to inhibit two mechanisms implicated in retinal diseases: IL-6 and VEGF. Our KSI-101 product candidate is the unconjugated protein

23

portion of KSI-501 and is a novel bispecific protein targeting IL-6 and VEGF. There are some potential side effects associated with intravitreal anti-VEGF therapies such as intraocular hemorrhage, intraocular pressure elevation, retinal detachment, inflammation, vasculitis, artery occlusion or infection inside the eye, progression of cataract, and over-inhibition of VEGF, as well as the potential for potential systemic side effects such as heart attack, stroke, wound healing problems and high blood pressure. Recent trends in the development of anti-VEGF therapies have favored increased molar dosages, as compared to currently marketed treatments. To date these heightened dosages have not exhibited a safety profile significantly worse than that of current treatments, as attributable to molar dose. However, anti-VEGF product candidates featuring higher molar dosages, including tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101 may heighten the risk of adverse effects associated with anti-VEGF treatments generally, both in the eye and in the rest of the body. There are risks inherent in the intravitreal injection procedure of drugs like tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101 which can cause injury to the eye and other complications including conjunctival hemorrhage, punctate keratitis, eye pain, conjunctival hyperemia, intra-ocular inflammation and endophthalmitis. Any additional toxicology signal observed, be it real or perceived, may negatively impact perceptions of utilization of tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101 in broader populations and impact clinical trial enrollment, regulatory approval and commercial success.

Additionally, if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects or adverse events caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

•

regulatory authorities may withdraw approvals of such product;

•

regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label;

•

we may be required to change the way the product is administered or conduct additional clinical trials or post-approval studies;

•

we may be required to create a REMS plan, which could include a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients, a communication plan for healthcare providers and/or other elements to assure safe use;

•

we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients; and

•

our reputation may suffer.

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations, and prospects.

We may encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials and our clinical development activities could thereby be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until its conclusion. We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including:

•

the size and nature of the patient population;

•

the patient eligibility criteria defined in the protocol, including certain highly-specific criteria related to stage of disease progression, which may limit the patient populations eligible for our clinical trials to a greater extent than competing clinical trials for the same indication that do not have such patient eligibility criteria;

•

the size of the study population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints;

•

the proximity of patients to a trial site;

•

the effects of health epidemics, including the resulting shelter-in-place, travel or similar restrictions;

•

the design of the trial;

•

new safety events may cause physicians to decrease patient enrollment in our current or planned studies;

•

our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience;

•

competing clinical trials for similar therapies or targeting patient populations meeting our patient eligibility criteria;

24

•

clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and side effects of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies and product candidates;

•

our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents; and

•

the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will not complete such trials, for any reason.

Our inability to enroll a sufficient number of patients for our clinical trials could result in significant delays or may require us to abandon one or more clinical trials altogether. Enrollment delays in our clinical trials may result in increased development costs for our product candidates, delay or halt the development of and approval processes for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence sales of and generate revenues from our product candidates, which may harm our business and results of operation.

Our clinical trials may fail to demonstrate substantial evidence of the durability, efficacy and safety of our product candidates, which would prevent, delay or limit the scope of regulatory approval and commercialization.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are both safe and effective for use in each target indication. For those product candidates that are subject to regulation as biological drug products, we will need to demonstrate that they are safe, pure, and potent for use in their target indications. Each product candidate must demonstrate an adequate risk versus benefit profile in its intended patient population and for its intended use, which is especially true for anti-VEGF biologic agents, where available marketed therapies are well-established products with accepted safety profiles.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Most product candidates that begin clinical trials are never approved by regulatory authorities for commercialization. The results of preclinical studies of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of early-stage or later-stage clinical trials, and results of early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. The results of clinical trials in one set of patients or disease indications may not be predictive of those obtained in another. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety, efficacy or durability results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the dosing regimen and other clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety, efficacy and durability profile despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or unacceptable safety issues, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. For example, in our Phase 2b/3 DAZZLE clinical trial evaluating the efficacy, durability and safety of tarcocimab in treatment-naïve subjects with neovascular wet AMD and in our Phase 3 GLEAM and GLIMMER studies, tarcocimab did not meet the primary efficacy endpoint of showing non-inferior visual acuity gains.

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

In addition, even if such clinical trials are successfully completed, we cannot guarantee that the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities will interpret the results as we do, and more trials or trials of a different design could be required before we submit our product candidates for approval. To the extent that the results of trials are not satisfactory to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities for support of a marketing application, we may be required to expend significant resources, which may not be available to us, to conduct additional trials in support of potential approval of our product candidates. Even if regulatory approval is secured for any of our product candidates, the terms of such approval may limit the scope and use of our product candidate, which may also limit its commercial potential. Even if trial results are successful at the primary endpoint, clinical trial results may be different or worse in the extended treatment periods following the primary endpoint, and such data may negatively impact perceptions by regulatory authorities, the clinical community or commercial payors of the benefits of our product candidates.

25

We may not be successful in our efforts to continue to create a pipeline of product candidates or to develop commercially successful products. If we fail to successfully identify and develop additional product candidates, our commercial opportunity may be limited.

Our research methodology may be unsuccessful in identifying potential product candidates, or our potential product candidates may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may make them unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval. Identifying, developing, obtaining regulatory approval and commercializing additional product candidates for the treatment of retinal diseases will require substantial additional funding and is prone to the risks of failure inherent in drug development. If we are unable to successfully identify, acquire, develop and commercialize additional product candidates, our commercial opportunity may be limited.

One of our strategies is to identify and pursue clinical development of product candidates based on our ABC Platform. Our ABC Platform may not produce a pipeline of viable product candidates, or our competitors may develop platform technologies that render our ABC Platform obsolete or less attractive.

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological and scientific change, and there is a possibility that our competitors may retain their market share with existing drugs, or achieve regulatory approval before us or develop therapies that are safer, more advanced or more effective than ours, which may negatively impact our ability to successfully market or commercialize any product candidates we may develop and ultimately harm our financial condition.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We may face competition with respect to any product candidates that we seek to develop or commercialize in the future from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, and biotechnology companies worldwide. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies, and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection, and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing, and commercialization.

There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are currently pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the retinal diseases for which we have product candidates. Several of our competitors have commercially approved products for the treatment of retinal diseases that we are pursuing or may pursue in the future, including Roche, Regeneron and Novartis for the treatment of wet AMD, DME, DR and RVO. These drugs are well established therapies and are widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors, which may make it difficult to educate these parties on the benefits of switching to any product candidates developed by us. In addition, multiple biosimilars referencing established anti-VEGF therapies have been approved in the United States and are entering the market, which may increase pricing and competitive pressures. Companies that we are aware are developing and/or commercializing therapeutics in the retinal disease area include large companies with significant financial resources, such as Roche, Novartis, Bayer, Regeneron, AbbVie, Boehringer Ingelheim, Amgen, and Samsung Bioepis. In addition to competition from other companies targeting retinal indications, any products we may develop may also face competition from other types of therapies, such as gene-editing therapies and drug delivery devices.

Roche’s product, Vabysmo (faricimab) received FDA approval for the treatment of wet AMD and DME in January 2022 and received FDA approval for RVO in October 2023. Vabysmo has gained rapid adoption since launch and garnered significant market share. Regeneron’s product, Eylea HD (high dose aflibercept) gained FDA approval for the treatment of wet AMD, DME and DR in August 2023 and received FDA approval for RVO in November 2025. It has also become an important therapy in the marketplace due to Regeneron’s incumbent position in retinal diseases. Even if our product candidates present a compelling clinical profile, we may not be able to market our product candidates as effectively as our competitors. For example, entrenched franchises may seek to impede adoption of our product candidates through significant discounts or rebates.

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their strategic partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our product candidates. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Furthermore, currently approved products could be discovered to have application for treatment of retinal disease indications, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over any of our product candidates. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours. Additionally, products or technologies developed by our competitors may render our product candidates uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing any product candidates we may develop against competitors.

26

The manufacture of our product candidates is highly complex and requires substantial lead time to produce.

Manufacturing our product candidates involves complex processes, including developing cells or cell systems to produce the biologic, growing large quantities of such cells, and harvesting and purifying the biologic produced by them. These processes require specialized facilities, highly specific raw materials and other production constraints. As a result, the cost to manufacture a biologic is generally far higher than traditional small molecule chemical compounds, and the biologics manufacturing process is less reliable and is difficult to reproduce. Because of the complex nature of our products, we need to oversee the manufacture of multiple components that require a diverse knowledge base and specialized personnel. Commercial manufacturing scale-up timelines may be negatively affected by material shortages, construction delays and supply chain challenges due to, among other factors, global supply chain shortages due to health epidemics, on-going geopolitical conflicts, global macroeconomic conditions, bank failures or other reasons.

Moreover, unlike chemical pharmaceuticals, the physical and chemical properties of a biologic such as our product candidates generally cannot be adequately characterized prior to manufacturing the final product. As a result, an assay of the finished product is not sufficient to ensure that the product will perform in the intended manner. Accordingly, we employ multiple steps to attempt to control our manufacturing process to assure that the process works, and the product candidate is made strictly and consistently in compliance with the process.

Manufacturing biologics is highly susceptible to product loss due to contamination, equipment failure, improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error, improper storage or transfer, inconsistency in yields and variability in product characteristics. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing, distribution or storage processes could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. Some of the raw materials required in our manufacturing process are derived from biological sources. Such raw materials are difficult to procure and may also be subject to contamination or recall. A material shortage, contamination, recall or restriction on the use of biologically derived substances in the manufacture of our product candidates could adversely impact or disrupt commercialization. Production of additional drug substance and drug product for any of our product candidates may require substantial lead time. In the event of significant product loss and materials shortages, we may be unable to produce adequate amounts of our product candidates or products for our operational needs.

Further, as product candidates are developed through preclinical studies to late-stage clinical trials towards approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials.

We rely on third parties for raw materials needed for manufacturing our product candidates. We may not be able to obtain adequate amounts in the future. These challenges are magnified by the international nature of our supply chain, which, for tarcocimab, KSI-501 and KSI-101, requires drug substance and drug product sourced from single source suppliers from China, Japan, the United Kingdom, the United States and Switzerland.

We have limited experience manufacturing any of our product candidates on a commercial scale. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers encounter difficulties in production, or fail to meet rigorously enforced regulatory standards, our ability to provide supply of our product candidates for clinical trials, or our ability to supply our products for patients, if approved, could be delayed or stopped, or we may be unable to establish a commercially viable cost structure.

In order to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates, or supply commercial products, if approved, we will need to manufacture them in small and large quantities. Our third-party manufacturer has made only a limited number of commercial scale lots of tarcocimab based on our ABC Platform. Our manufacturing partners may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our product candidates in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up activities.If our manufacturing partners are unable to successfully scale up the manufacture of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity, the development, testing and clinical trials of our product candidates may be delayed or become infeasible, and regulatory approval or commercial launch of any resulting product may be delayed or not obtained, which could significantly harm our business. The same risks would apply to any internal manufacturing facilities, should we in the future decide to build internal manufacturing capacity.

In addition, the manufacturing process for any products that we may develop is subject to FDA, EMA and foreign regulatory authority approval processes and continuous oversight. We will need to contract with manufacturers who can meet all applicable FDA, EMA and foreign regulatory authority requirements, including complying with current good manufacturing practices, or cGMPs, on an on-going basis. If we or our third-party manufacturers are unable to reliably produce products to specifications acceptable to the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities, we may not obtain or maintain the approvals we need to commercialize such products. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that either we or our CMOs will be able to manufacture the approved product to

27

specifications acceptable to the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product, or to meet potential future demand. For example, our manufacturers are also engaged in the manufacturing of vaccines and other therapeutic treatments, and the success of and demand for these vaccines and other therapeutic treatments means we and our programs are competing for scarce manufacturing resources. We hope to distribute tarcocimab in a prefilled syringe early in our commercial rollout. We may not be able to complete our prefilled syringe activities in a timely manner, or we may fail technically to design and develop a prefilled syringe for tarcocimab. Any of these challenges could delay completion of clinical trials, require bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidate, impair commercialization efforts, increase our cost of goods, and have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

Changes in methods of manufacturing or formulation of product candidates may result in additional costs or delay.

As product candidates proceed through preclinical studies to late-stage clinical trials towards potential approval and commercialization, our manufacturing methods and formulation of product candidates may be altered in an effort to optimize manufacturing processes and results. For example, we have created an enhanced, commercial formulation of tarcocimab; however, these changes could cause tarcocimab to perform differently and affect the results of on-going clinical trials or other future clinical trials, and we may need to revert to a prior formulation and may be unable to recover the manufacturing costs of the drug product. In addition, changes to commercial formulations from those studied clinically could also lead regulatory authorities to delay the approval of our marketing applications until we can demonstrate through additional clinical data that there is comparability in the bioavailability of the two different formulations, or they may require us to revert to the prior formulation evaluated clinically. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of tarcocimab or any future product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue.

The development program and timeline of tarcocimab may impact our ability to use the Ursus Facility as intended, which could be costly.

In August 2020, we, together with our wholly owned subsidiary Kodiak Sciences GmbH, entered into a manufacturing agreement with Lonza Ltd for the clinical and commercial supply of the Company’s antibody biopolymer conjugate drug substance, which included a custom-built manufacturing facility for the potential clinical and commercial supply of tarcocimab, or the Ursus Facility. The development plan for tarcocimab, and any further changes thereto, as well as the timeline and success of tarcocimab, may impact our ability to fully utilize the Ursus Facility. We may not realize any benefit from the capital expenditures to date, and we may incur substantial additional expenses and capital expenditures to repurpose the Ursus Facility for our other product candidates or for use by third parties, any of which may negatively impact our operating results and financial condition.

Even if we are successful in utilizing the Ursus Facility, our manufacturing capabilities could be affected by cost-overruns, additional changes in our development plans, unexpected delays, equipment failures, labor shortages, natural disasters, power failures and numerous other factors that could prevent us from realizing the intended benefits of our manufacturing strategy and have a material adverse effect on our business. Any problems in our manufacturing process or facilities could make us a less attractive collaborator for potential partners, including larger pharmaceutical companies and academic research institutions, which could limit our access to additional attractive development programs.

If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market any product candidates we may develop, we may not be successful in commercializing those product candidates if and when they are approved.

We do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure and have no experience in the sale, marketing or distribution of pharmaceutical products. To achieve commercial success for any approved product for which we retain sales and marketing responsibilities, we must either develop a sales and marketing organization or outsource these functions to third parties. In the future, we may choose to build a focused sales, marketing and commercial support infrastructure to sell, or participate in sales activities with our collaborators for, some of our product candidates if and when they are approved.

There are risks involved with both establishing our own commercial capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training a sales force or reimbursement specialists is expensive and time consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing and other commercialization capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our commercialization personnel.

28

Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize any approved product on our own include:

•

our inability to recruit and retain adequate numbers of effective sales, marketing, reimbursement, customer service, medical affairs and other support personnel;

•

the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or educate adequate numbers of physicians on the benefits of prescribing any future approved products;

•

the inability of reimbursement professionals to negotiate arrangements for formulary access, reimbursement, and other acceptance by payors;

•

the inability to price our products at a sufficient price point to ensure an adequate and attractive level of profitability;

•

restricted or closed distribution channels that make it difficult to distribute our products to segments of the patient population;

•

the lack of complementary products to be offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more extensive product lines; and

•

unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent commercialization organization.

If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing, commercial support and distribution services, our product revenue or the profitability of product revenue may be lower than if we were to market and sell any products we may develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to commercialize our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We may have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we do not establish commercialization capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates if approved.

Even if any product candidates we develop receive marketing approval, they may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

The commercial success of any of our product candidates will depend upon its degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. Even if any product candidates we may develop receive marketing approval, they may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors, and others in the medical community. The degree of market acceptance of any product candidates we may develop, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

•

the efficacy and safety of such product candidates as demonstrated in pivotal clinical trials and published in peer-reviewed journals;

•

the potential and perceived advantages of our product label as compared to alternative treatments;

•

the ability to offer our products for sale at competitive prices;

•

the ability to offer appropriate patient access programs, such as appropriate co-pay assistance;

•

the extent to which physicians recommend our products to their patients;

•

the convenience and ease of dosing and administration compared to alternative treatments;

•

the clinical indications for which the product candidate is approved by FDA, EMA or other regulatory agencies;

•

product labeling or product insert requirements of the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including any limitations, contraindications or warnings contained in a product’s approved labeling;

•

restrictions on how the product is distributed;

•

the timing of market introduction of competitive products;

•

publicity concerning our products or competing products and treatments;

•

the strength of marketing and distribution support;

•

sufficient third-party coverage or reimbursement; and

•

the prevalence and severity of any side effects.

29

If any product candidates we develop do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenue, and we may not become profitable.

Even if we are able to commercialize any product candidates, such products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives, which would harm our business.

Drug pricing and access policies in the United States and internationally may change and negatively impact the commercial viability of our product candidates. Proposed policy changes, including the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, may limit our ability to competitively price our product candidates, if approved. Further, commercial insurers may limit patient access to our product candidates, if approved and other branded therapies. The regulations that govern marketing approvals, pricing and reimbursement for new drugs vary widely from country to country. In the United States, recently enacted legislation may significantly change the approval requirements in ways that could involve additional costs and cause delays in obtaining approvals. Some countries require approval of the sale price of a drug before it can be marketed. In many countries, the pricing review period begins after marketing or product licensing approval is granted. In some foreign markets, prescription pharmaceutical pricing remains subject to continuing governmental control even after initial approval is granted. As a result, we might obtain marketing approval for a product in a particular country, but then be subject to price regulations that delay our commercial launch of the product, possibly for lengthy time periods, and negatively impact the revenue we are able to generate from the sale of the product in that country. Adverse pricing limitations may hinder our ability to recoup our investment in one or more product candidates, even if any product candidates we may develop obtain marketing approval.

Our ability to successfully commercialize any products that we may develop also will depend in part on the extent to which reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers, and other organizations. Government authorities and third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which medications they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Government authorities currently impose mandatory discounts for certain patient groups, such as Medicare, Medicaid and Veterans Affairs, or VA, hospitals, and may seek to increase such discounts at any time. Future regulation may negatively impact the price of our products, if approved. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product candidate that we commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, that the level of reimbursement will be sufficient.

Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. In order to get reimbursement, physicians may need to show that patients have superior treatment outcomes with our products compared to standard of care drugs, including lower-priced generic versions of standard of care drugs. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors and coverage and reimbursement levels for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time consuming and costly process that may require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.

There may be significant delays in obtaining reimbursement for newly approved drugs, and coverage may be more limited than the purposes for which the medicine is approved by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Moreover, eligibility for reimbursement does not imply that any drug will be paid for in all cases or at a rate that covers our costs, including research, development, manufacture, sale, and distribution. Interim reimbursement levels for new drugs, if applicable, may also not be sufficient to cover our costs and may not be made permanent. Reimbursement rates may vary according to the use of the drug and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost drugs and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. Third-party payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own reimbursement policies. Further, coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Therefore, even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. Our inability to promptly obtain and maintain coverage and profitable payment rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products we may develop could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize product candidates, and our overall financial condition.

30

Our product candidates may face competition from biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with our product candidates sooner than anticipated.

The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biological product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product. The law is complex and is still being interpreted and implemented by the FDA. As a result, its ultimate impact, implementation and meaning are subject to uncertainty.

We believe that any of our product candidates approved as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our product candidates to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of our reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing.

If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates.

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of the clinical testing of our product candidates and will face an even greater risk when and if we commercialize any products. For example, we may be sued if our product candidates cause or are perceived to cause injury or are found to be otherwise unsuitable during clinical testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability or a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit testing and commercialization of our product candidates. Even successful defense would require significant financial and management resources. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:

•

decreased or interrupted demand for our products;

•

impairment of our business reputation;

•

withdrawal of clinical trial participants and inability to continue clinical trials;

•

initiation of investigations by regulators;

•

costs to defend the related litigation;

•

a diversion of management’s time and our resources;

•

substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients;

•

product recalls, withdrawals or labeling, marketing or promotional restrictions;

•

loss of revenue;

•

exhaustion of any available insurance and our capital resources;

•

the inability to commercialize any product candidate; and

•

a decline in our share price.

Our inability to obtain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of products we develop, alone or with collaborators. Our insurance policies may have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We may have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts. Even if our agreements with any future corporate collaborators entitle us to indemnification against losses, such indemnification may not be available or adequate should any claim arise.

31

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval and Other Legal Compliance Matters

The regulatory approval processes of the FDA, European Medicines Agency, or EMA, and comparable foreign regulatory authorities are lengthy, time consuming, expensive and inherently unpredictable. If we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will be unable to generate product revenue and our business will be substantially harmed.

The time required to obtain approval by the FDA, EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities is unpredictable, typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions, which may cause delays in the approval or the decision not to approve an application. Regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and may refuse to accept any application or may decide that our data are insufficient for approval and require additional preclinical, clinical or other studies. We have not submitted for or obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate, and it is possible that none of our existing product candidates or any product candidates we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain regulatory approval.

Applications for our product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including but not limited to the following:

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design, implementation or results of our clinical trials or the portfolio of clinical trials planned for submission in our BLA;

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may determine that our product candidates are not safe and effective, only moderately effective or have undesirable or unintended side effects, toxicities or other characteristics that preclude our obtaining marketing approval or prevent or limit commercial use of our products;

•

the population studied in the clinical program may not be sufficiently broad or representative to assure efficacy and safety in the full population for which we seek approval;

•

we may be unable to demonstrate to the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate’s risk-benefit ratio for its proposed indication(s), when compared to the standard of care, is acceptable;

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials;

•

the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to support the submission of a BLA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere;

•

study data may not be positive in all clinical trials demonstrating a mix of positive and negative clinical trial results;

•

the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may fail to approve the chemistry, manufacturing and controls processes, test procedures and specifications, or facilities or third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies; and

•

the approval policies or regulations of the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our clinical data insufficient for approval.

This lengthy approval process, as well as the unpredictability of the results of clinical trials, may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any of our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations, and prospects.

We have conducted clinical trials for our product candidates outside the United States (or the respective jurisdictions of other regulatory authorities), and the FDA (or EMA and applicable foreign regulatory authorities) may not accept data from such trials.

We have conducted one or more of our clinical trials outside the United States, including Europe and other foreign countries. The acceptance of study data from global clinical trials by the FDA, EMA or applicable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (1) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice and (2) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory bodies have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA, EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of their respective jurisdiction. If the FDA, EMA or any applicable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which would

32

be costly and time-consuming, would delay aspects of our business plan and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval or clearance for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions.

Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. For example, even if the FDA, EMA or grants marketing approval of a product candidate, we would not be permitted to manufacture, market or promote the product candidate in other countries unless and until comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions had approved the candidate for use in their countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials. There can be no assurance that any clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction will be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions.

Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we or any collaborator we work with fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, our products will remain subject to extensive obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense, and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements.

If any of our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to on-going regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies and submission of safety, efficacy and other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and requirements of comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive requirements imposed by the FDA, EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any BLA or marketing authorization application, or MAA. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates will be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed and promoted or to the conditions of approval (including the requirement to implement a REMS), or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing. We will be required to report certain adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA, EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Any new legislation addressing drug safety issues could result in delays in product development or commercialization, or increased costs to assure compliance. The FDA and other agencies, including the Department of Justice, closely regulate and monitor the post-approval marketing and promotion of products to ensure that they are manufactured, marketed and distributed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. We will have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. As such, we may not promote our products for indications or uses for which they do not have approval. The holder of an approved BLA or MAA must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling or manufacturing process. We could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical trials to verify the safety and efficacy of our products in general or in specific patient subsets. If original marketing approval was obtained via the accelerated approval pathway, we could be required to conduct a successful post-marketing clinical trial to confirm clinical benefit for our products. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.

If a regulatory agency discovers previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, or disagrees with the promotion, marketing or labeling of a product, such regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product or us, including requiring withdrawal of the product from the market. If we fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency or enforcement authority may, among other things:

33

•

issue fines, warning letters or other enforcement-related letters that would result in adverse publicity;

•

impose civil or criminal penalties;

•

suspend or withdraw regulatory approvals;

•

suspend any of our on-going clinical trials;

•

refuse to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications submitted by us;

•

impose restrictions on our operations, including closing our contract manufacturers’ facilities;

•

seize or detain products; or

•

require a product recall.

Any government investigation of alleged violations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with on-going regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected.

In addition, the policies of the FDA and of other regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper decision could result in additional legal challenges to regulations and decisions issued by federal agencies, including the FDA, on which we rely. Any such legal challenges, if successful, could have a material impact on our business. Additionally, the Loper decision may result in increased regulatory uncertainty, inconsistent judicial interpretations, and other impacts to the agency rulemaking process, any of which could adversely impact our business and operations. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies and regulatory authorities caused by funding shortages or a government shutdown could hinder their ability to hire and retain key leadership and other personnel, prevent new products and services from being developed or commercialized in a timely manner or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business.

The ability of the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, government shutdowns, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies and comparable regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for new drugs or biologics to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies and regulatory authorities, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, including the recent government shutdown that began on October 1, 2025 and ended on November 12, 2025, and previously from December 22, 2018 to January 25, 2019, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, have had to furlough critical FDA, SEC and other government employees and stop critical activities. If the current government shutdown continues or a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

34

Healthcare legislative measures aimed at reducing healthcare costs may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

Third-party payors, whether domestic or foreign, or governmental or commercial, are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs. In both the United States and certain international jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the health care system that could impact our ability to sell our products profitably. In particular, in 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the ACA, was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers.

Since the ACA’s enactment, there have been numerous challenges and amendments to the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or the OBBBA, was signed into law, which narrowed access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired ACA subsidies.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. These changes include, for example, aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which began in 2013 and will remain in effect until 2032 unless additional Congressional action is taken.

There have been, and likely will continue to be, legislative and regulatory proposals at the foreign, federal and state levels directed at containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. For example, the current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, the CMS, and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct-to-consumer platform, or TrumpRx, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare Plan," to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

We cannot predict the initiatives that may be adopted in the future or their impact on our business. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare and/or impose price controls may adversely affect, among other things:

•

the demand for our product candidates, if we obtain regulatory approval;

•

our ability to receive or set a price that we believe is fair for our products;

•

our ability to generate revenue and achieve or maintain profitability;

•

the level of taxes that we are required to pay; and

•

the availability of capital.

35

Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements or insider trading violations, which could significantly harm our business.

We are exposed to the risk of fraud, misconduct or other illegal activity by our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial partners and vendors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and negligent conduct that fails to: comply with the laws of the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities; provide true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities; comply with manufacturing standards we have established; comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws in the United States and similar foreign fraudulent misconduct laws; or report financial information or data accurately or to disclose unauthorized activities to us. If we obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our potential exposure under such laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with such laws are also likely to increase. In particular, research, sales, marketing, education and other business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws designed to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, educating, marketing and promotion, sales and commission, certain customer incentive programs and other business arrangements generally. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of patient recruitment for clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of, including improper trading based upon, information obtained in the course of clinical studies, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation.

We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics that applies to all our employees, including management, and our directors. However, it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant fines or other sanctions.

If we fail to comply with healthcare laws, we could face substantial penalties and our business, operations and financial conditions could be adversely affected.

Our current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payors, customers, and others may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, as well as, sell, market and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. The laws that may impact our operations include:

•

the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce, or in return for, either the referral of an individual, or the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of any good, facility, item or service for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, 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;

•

federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the False Claims Act, which can be enforced by private citizens on behalf of the government through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and civil monetary penalty laws, which impose criminal and civil penalties against individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, claims for payment or approval from Medicare, Medicaid or other third-party payors that are false or fraudulent or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government;

•

HIPAA, which created new federal criminal statutes that, among other things, prohibit knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations, or promises, any of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the payor (e.g., public or private) and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by any trick or device a material fact or making any materially false statements in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not

36

need to have actual knowledge of these statutes or specific intent to violate them in order to have committed a violation;

•

HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, which impose requirements on certain covered healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses and their respective business associates and their subcontractors that perform services for them that involve the use, or disclosure of, individually identifiable health information as well as their covered subcontractors, relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information;

•

the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, created under the ACA, and its implementing regulations, which require manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologicals and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to CMS under the Open Payments Program, information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistant and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members;

•

federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers; and

•

analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state and foreign anti-kickback, false claims, consumer protection and unfair competition laws which may apply to pharmaceutical business practices, including but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements as well as submitting claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers; state and local laws that require certain regulatory licenses to manufacture or distribute our products commercially and/or the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government that otherwise restricts payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug manufacturers to file reports with states regarding pricing and marketing information, such as the tracking and reporting of gifts, compensations and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities; and state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could, despite our efforts to comply, be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements will comply with applicable healthcare laws may involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental and enforcement authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law interpreting applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, disgorgement, monetary fines, imprisonment, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. In addition, the approval and commercialization of any of our product candidates outside the United States will also likely subject us to foreign equivalents of the healthcare laws mentioned above, among other foreign laws.

We and the third parties with whom we work are subject to stringent and evolving obligations related to data privacy and security. These obligations include U.S. and foreign laws, regulations and rules; contractual obligations; industry standards and policies. Our (or the third parties with whom we work) actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations and actions; litigation (including class claims) and arbitration; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue and profits; loss of sales and other adverse business consequences.

In the ordinary course of business, we and the third parties with whom we work collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and sensitive third-party data (collectively, sensitive information). Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations such as various laws and regulations, as well as guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements, and other obligations related to data privacy and security. Data privacy and security laws and regulations are evolving and resulting in increased regulatory and public scrutiny and escalating levels of enforcement and sanctions.

37

In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). Numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights include, in relation to their personal data, the right to access, correct, delete and opt-out of certain data processing activities (such as targeted advertising, profiling and automated decision-making). The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. Certain of these state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act, or the CCPA, applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, and requires businesses subject to the law to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and respond to requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for civil penalties and a private right of action for certain data breaches (which could lead to the recovery of significant statutory damages). Although these laws may exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, these laws increase compliance efforts, legal risks and compliance costs for us and the third parties with whom we work. Similar laws are being considered in other states as well as at the federal and local levels. We expect more legislatures to pass additional privacy or security laws in the future.

Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards apply to data privacy and security. For example, the EU GDPR and the United Kingdom’s GDPR, or UK GDPR (collectively, GDPR), impose strict requirements for processing personal data. Violators of these laws face potential significant penalties. For example, under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions; fines of up to 20 million Euros (under the EU GDPR) or 17.5 million pounds sterling (under the UK GDPR), or 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater. Further, the EU and UK GDPR also provide for private litigation related to the processing of personal data that can be brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent the data subjects’ interests.

Our personnel and others with whom we work use generative artificial intelligence, or AI and/or automated decision-making technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws and regulations regulating AI and/or automated decision-making technologies. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use AI and/or automated decision-making technologies, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages.

In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to, for example, data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data transfers. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the EEA and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt or have already adopted similarly stringent data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms (such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement/Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension), that may be used to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States or other countries, these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures. An inability or material limitation on our ability to transfer personal data to the United States or other countries could materially impact our business operations. If there were no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK or other jurisdictions to the United States or other jurisdictions, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we may face increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines, and injunctions against processing or transferring personal data from Europe and other foreign jurisdictions. The inability to transfer personal data to the United States or other jurisdictions could significantly and negatively impact our business operations by limiting our ability to conduct clinical trial activities in Europe and elsewhere; limiting our ability to collaborate with parties that are subject to such cross-border data transfer or localization laws; or requiring us to increase our personal data processing capabilities and infrastructure in foreign jurisdictions at significant expense. Additionally, entities that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased regulator, individual litigant, and activist group scrutiny. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain data transfers out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer requirements.

Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a rule entitled the Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons, which places additional restriction on certain data transactions involving countries of concern (e.g., China, Russia, Iran) and covered persons (i.e., individuals and entities who are designated as such by the U.S. Attorney General or considered “foreign persons” and are majority owned by, organized under the laws of, a primary resident in, or a contractor of, a covered person or country of concern, as applicable) that impacts certain business activities such as vendor engagements, sale or sharing of data, employment of certain individuals, and investor agreements. Violations of the rule could lead to significant civil and criminal fines and penalties. The rule applies regardless of whether data is anonymized, key-coded, pseudonymized, de-identified or encrypted, which presents particular

38

challenges for companies like ours that operate in the clinical trial space and impacts the ability to transfer data in connection with certain transactions or agreements.

In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are contractually subject to industry standards adopted by industry groups and, we are, and may become in the future, subject to such obligations. We are also bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. We also publish statements regarding data privacy and security. Regulators are increasingly scrutinizing these statements, and if these statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, misleading or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to, among other things, investigations, enforcement actions and other adverse consequences.

Obligations related to data privacy and security (and individuals’ data privacy and security expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources, which may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. In addition, these obligations may require us to change our business model.

We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our data privacy and security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties with whom we work may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business. If we or any third party with whom we work fail or are perceived to have failed to address or comply with applicable obligations relating to data privacy and security, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to: regulatory fines and bans on processing personal data; investigations and enforcement actions, penalties and other liabilities, litigation (including class action claims and mass arbitration demands); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; orders to destroy or not use personal data; interruptions or stoppages in our development process and business operations (including, as relevant, our clinical trial activities); and damage to our reputation. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis which could result in significant damages. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and/or growth prospects.

If we or any contract manufacturers and suppliers we engage fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business.

We and any contract manufacturers and suppliers we engage are subject to numerous federal, state and local environmental, health, and safety laws, regulations, and permitting requirements, including those governing laboratory procedures; the generation, handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous and regulated materials and wastes; the emission and discharge of hazardous materials into the ground, air and water; and employee health and safety. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological and radioactive materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. Under certain environmental laws, we could be held responsible for costs relating to any contamination at our current or past facilities and at third-party facilities. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties.

Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our research, product development and manufacturing efforts. In addition, we cannot entirely eliminate the risk of accidental injury or contamination from these materials or wastes. Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not carry specific biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage, and our property, casualty, and general liability insurance policies specifically exclude coverage for damages and fines arising from biological or hazardous waste exposure or contamination. Accordingly, in the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for damages or be penalized with fines in an amount exceeding our resources, and our clinical trials or regulatory approvals could be suspended, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Our business activities may be subject to the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or FCPA, and similar anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws.

Our business activities may be subject to the FCPA and similar anti-bribery or anti-corruption laws, regulations or rules of other countries in which we operate or may operate in the future, including the UK Bribery Act. The FCPA generally prohibits offering, promising, giving or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S.

39

government official in order to influence official action, or otherwise obtain or retain business. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. Our business is heavily regulated and therefore involves significant interaction with public officials, including officials of non-U.S. governments. Additionally, in many other countries, the health care providers who prescribe pharmaceuticals are employed by their government, and the purchasers of pharmaceuticals are government entities; therefore, our dealings with these prescribers and purchasers are subject to regulation under the FCPA. Recently the SEC and Department of Justice have increased their FCPA enforcement activities with respect to biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. There can be no assurance that all of our employees, agents, contractors or collaborators, or those of our affiliates, will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, particularly given the high level of complexity of these laws. Violations of these laws and regulations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers, or our employees, the closing down of our facilities, requirements to obtain export licenses, cessation of business activities in sanctioned countries, implementation of compliance programs and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Any such violations could include prohibitions on our ability to offer our products in one or more countries and could materially damage our reputation, our brand, our ability to attract and retain employees, and our business, prospects, operating results, and financial condition.

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We expect to rely on third parties to conduct many aspects of our clinical trials and some aspects of our research and preclinical testing, and those third parties may not perform satisfactorily, including failing to meet deadlines for the completion of such trials, research or testing.

We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as clinical investigators, medical institutions, clinical data management organizations, and other third-party vendors, to conduct some aspects of our research, preclinical testing and clinical trials. Any of these third parties may terminate their engagements with us or be unable to fulfill their contractual obligations. If we need to enter into alternative arrangements, it would delay our product development activities.

Our reliance on these third parties for research and development activities reduces our control over these activities, but does not relieve us of our responsibilities. For example, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial. Moreover, the FDA requires us to comply with GCPs for conducting, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible, reproducible and accurate and that the rights, integrity and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. We are also required to register on-going clinical trials and to post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database within certain timeframes. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for any product candidates we may develop and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our medicines.

We also expect to rely on other third parties to store and distribute drug supplies for our clinical trials. Any performance failure on the part of our distributors could delay clinical development or marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop or commercialization of our medicines, producing additional losses and depriving us of potential product revenue.

We contract with third parties for the manufacture of materials for our product candidates and preclinical studies and clinical trials and for commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. This reliance on third parties carries and may increase the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of such materials, product candidates or any medicines that we may develop and commercialize, or that such supply will not be available to us at an acceptable cost, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts.

We currently rely on a third-party manufacturer, Lonza, for the manufacture of our materials for preclinical studies and clinical trials and expect to continue to do so for preclinical studies, clinical trials and for commercial supply of any product candidates that we may develop.

We may be unable to establish any further agreements with third-party manufacturers or to do so on acceptable terms. Even if we are able to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers, reliance on third-party manufacturers entails additional risks, including:

•

the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party or us;

40

•

the possible termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us;

•

the possible early termination of the agreement by us at a time that requires us to pay a cancellation fee;

•

reliance on the third party for regulatory compliance, quality assurance, safety and pharmacovigilance and related reporting; and

•

the inability to produce required volume in a timely manner and to quality standards.

Third-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP regulations or similar regulatory requirements outside the United States. Our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in clinical holds on our trials, sanctions being imposed on us, including fines, injunctions, civil penalties, delays, suspension or withdrawal of approvals, license revocations, seizures or recalls of product candidates or medicines, operating restrictions, and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our medicines and harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

Any medicines that we may develop may compete with other product candidates and products for access to manufacturing facilities. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that might be capable of manufacturing for us.

Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers could delay clinical development or marketing approval. We do not currently have arrangements in place for redundant supply for any of our product candidates. If any one of our current contract manufacturers cannot perform as agreed, we may be required to replace that manufacturer and may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement. Furthermore, securing and reserving production capacity with contract manufacturers may result in significant costs.

Our current and anticipated future reliance upon others for the manufacture of any product candidates we may develop or medicines may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any medicines that receive marketing approval on a timely and competitive basis.

We rely on third-party suppliers for key raw materials used in our manufacturing processes, and the loss of these third-party suppliers or their inability to supply us with adequate raw materials could harm our business.

We rely on third-party suppliers for the raw materials required for the production of our product candidates. Our reliance on these third-party suppliers and the challenges we may face in obtaining adequate supplies of raw materials involve several risks, including limited control over pricing, availability, quality and delivery schedules. As a small company, our negotiation leverage is limited and we are likely to get lower priority than our competitors who are larger than we are. We cannot be certain that our suppliers will continue to provide us with the quantities of these raw materials that we require or satisfy our anticipated specifications and quality requirements. Any supply interruption in limited or sole sourced raw materials could materially harm our ability to manufacture our product candidates until a new source of supply, if any, could be identified and qualified. We may be unable to find a sufficient alternative supply channel in a reasonable time or on commercially reasonable terms. Any performance failure on the part of our suppliers could delay the development and potential commercialization of our product candidates, including limiting supplies necessary for clinical trials and regulatory approvals, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may depend on collaborations with third parties for the research, development and commercialization of certain of the product candidates we may develop. If any such collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to realize the market potential of those product candidates.

We may seek third-party collaborators for the research, development and commercialization of certain of the product candidates we may develop. Our likely collaborators for any other collaboration arrangements include large and mid-size pharmaceutical companies, regional and national pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and academic institutions. If we enter into any such arrangements with any third parties, we will likely have shared or limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development or potential commercialization of any product candidates we may seek to develop with them. Our ability to generate revenue from these arrangements with commercial entities will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. We cannot predict the success of any collaboration that we enter into.

Collaborations involving our product candidates we may develop, pose the following risks to us:

•

collaborators generally have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations;

41

•

collaborators may not properly obtain, maintain, enforce or defend intellectual property or proprietary rights relating to our product candidates or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to expose us to potential litigation or other intellectual property related proceedings, including proceedings challenging the scope, ownership, validity and enforceability of our intellectual property;

•

collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering our product candidates that result from our collaboration with them, and in such cases, we may not have the exclusive right to commercialize such intellectual property or such product candidates;

•

disputes may arise with respect to the ownership of intellectual property developed pursuant to collaborations;

•

we may need the cooperation of our collaborators to enforce or defend any intellectual property we contribute to or that arises out of our collaborations, which may not be provided to us;

•

collaborators may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability;

•

disputes may arise between the collaborators and us that result in the delay or termination of the research, development, or commercialization of our product candidates or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;

•

collaborators may decide not to pursue development and commercialization of any product candidates we develop or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on clinical trial results, changes in the collaborator’s strategic focus or available funding or external factors such as an acquisition that diverts resources or creates competing priorities;

•

collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding for a clinical trial, stop a clinical trial or abandon a product candidate, repeat or conduct new clinical trials, or require a new formulation of a product candidate for clinical testing;

•

collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates if the collaborators believe that competitive products are more likely to be successfully developed or can be commercialized under terms that are more economically attractive than ours;

•

collaborators with marketing and distribution rights to one or more product candidates may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of such product candidates;

•

we may lose certain valuable rights under circumstances identified in our collaborations, including if we undergo a change of control;

•

collaborators may undergo a change of control and the new owners may decide to take the collaboration in a direction which is not in our best interest;

•

collaborators may become party to a business combination transaction and the continued pursuit and emphasis on our development or commercialization program by the resulting entity under our existing collaboration could be delayed, diminished or terminated;

•

collaborators may become bankrupt, which may significantly delay our research or development programs, or may cause us to lose access to valuable technology, know-how or intellectual property of the collaborator relating to our products, product candidates;

•

key personnel at our collaborators may leave, which could negatively impact our ability to productively work with our collaborators;

•

collaborations may require us to incur short and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our stockholders, or disrupt our management and business;

•

collaborations may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable product candidates or our ABC Platform; and

•

collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all.

We may face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborations. Recent business combinations among biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies have resulted in a reduced number of potential collaborators. In addition, the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex, and we may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on

42

acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which we are seeking to collaborate or delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

If we enter into collaborations to develop and potentially commercialize any product candidates, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we or our collaborator elect not to exercise the rights granted under the agreement or if we or our collaborator are unable to successfully integrate a product candidate into existing operations and company culture. In addition, if our agreement with any of our collaborators terminates, our access to technology and intellectual property licensed to us by that collaborator may be restricted or terminate entirely, which may delay our continued development of our product candidates utilizing the collaborator’s technology or intellectual property or require us to stop development of those product candidates completely. We may also find it more difficult to find a suitable replacement collaborator or attract new collaborators, and our development programs may be delayed or the perception of us in the business and financial communities could be adversely affected. Any collaborator may also be subject to many of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval, and commercialization described in this “Risk Factors” section, and any negative impact on our collaborators may adversely affect us.

Reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed.

Reliance on third parties to conduct clinical trials, assist in research and development and to manufacture our product candidates, will at times require us to share trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology by in part entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, including our trade secrets. Despite the contractual provisions employed when working with third parties, the need to share trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others, or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s independent discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection for any product candidates we develop or for our ABC Platform, our competitors could develop and commercialize products or technology similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize any product candidates we may develop, and our technology may be adversely affected.

Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our ABC Platform and any proprietary product candidates and other technologies we may develop. We seek to protect our proprietary position by in-licensing intellectual property and filing patent applications in the United States and abroad relating to our ABC Platform, product candidates and other technologies that are important to our business. We have filed or intend to file patent applications on core aspects of our technology and product candidates; however, there can be no assurance that any such patent applications will issue as granted patents. Furthermore, in some cases, we only have filed provisional patent applications on certain aspects of our technology and product candidates, and none of these provisional patent applications is eligible to become an issued patent until, among other things, we file a non-provisional patent application within 12 months of the filing date of the applicable provisional patent application. Any failure to file a non-provisional patent application within this timeline could cause us to lose the ability to obtain patent protection for the inventions described in the associated provisional patent applications. Furthermore, in some cases, we may not be able to obtain issued claims covering compositions relating to our ABC Platform and product candidates, as well as other technologies that are important to our business, and instead may need to rely on filing patent applications with claims covering a method of use and/or method of manufacture for protection of such ABC Platform, product candidates and other technologies. There can be no assurance that any such patent applications will issue as granted patents, and even if they do issue, such patent claims may be insufficient to prevent third parties, such as our competitors, from utilizing our technology. Any failure to obtain or maintain patent protection with respect to our ABC Platform and product candidates could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

If any of our patent applications does not issue as a patent in any jurisdiction, we may not be able to compete effectively.

Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, and obtain, maintain and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the

43

value of our intellectual property or narrow the scope of our owned and licensed patents. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient protection from competitors or other third parties.

The patent prosecution process is expensive, time-consuming and complex, and we may not be able to file, prosecute, maintain, enforce or license all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output in time to obtain patent protection. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, corporate collaborators, outside scientific collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between our inventions and the prior art allow our inventions to be patentable over the prior art. In addition, our own published applications may become prior art against our current or future patent applications. Furthermore, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, and in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions claimed in any of our patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.

If the scope of any patent protection we obtain is not sufficiently broad, or if we lose any of our patent protection, our ability to prevent our competitors from commercializing similar or identical technology and product candidates would be adversely affected.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has been the subject of much litigation in recent years. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our ABC Platform, product candidates or other technologies or that effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies and product candidates.

Moreover, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Even if patent applications we license or own currently or in the future issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us, or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Any patents may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented, rendered unenforceable or invalidated by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether our ABC Platform, product candidates or other technologies will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. We may be subject to a third party preissuance submission of prior art to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, post-grant and inter partes review, or interference proceedings or other similar proceedings challenging our patent rights. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate or render unenforceable, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our ABC Platform, product candidates or other technologies and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, we may have to participate in interference proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions and other challenges in a foreign patent office or administrative tribunal, that challenge our or our licensor’s priority of invention or other features of patentability with respect to our owned or in-licensed patents and patent applications. Such challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our ABC Platform, product candidates and other technologies. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

In addition, given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our intellectual property may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours.

44

We may not be able to protect our intellectual property and proprietary rights throughout the world.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents relating to our ABC Platform, product candidates and other technologies in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and the laws of foreign countries may not protect our rights to the same extent as U.S. laws. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of certain countries, particularly certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult, costly or impossible for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our intellectual property and proprietary rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property and proprietary rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license.

Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.