Item 1A. Risk Factors.

Our business faces significant risks. If any of the events or circumstances described in the following risks actually occurs, our business may suffer, the trading price of our common stock could decline and our financial condition or results of operations could be harmed. These risks should be read in conjunction with the other information set forth in this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones facing us. There may be additional risks faced by our business. Other events that we do not currently anticipate or that we currently deem immaterial also may adversely affect our financial condition or results of operations.

RISK FACTORS

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have incurred significant net losses since inception and we expect to continue to incur significant net losses for the foreseeable future.

We have incurred significant net losses since our inception and have financed our operations principally through equity and debt financing and our prior collaboration with Novartis. We continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. Our net loss was $210.3 million, $161.3 million and 123.3 million for the years ended December 31, 2024, 2023 and 2022, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $710.1 million. We have devoted substantially all of our resources and efforts to research and development, and we expect that it will be at least several years, if ever, before we generate revenue from product sales. Even if we receive marketing approval for and commercialize one or more of our product candidates, we expect that we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenses in order to further develop and, if approved, market additional potential product candidates.

We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if, and as, we:

•advance our product candidates through clinical development, and, if successful, later-stage clinical trials;

•discover and develop new product candidates;

•advance our preclinical development programs into clinical development;

•further develop manufacturing processes and manufacture our product candidates;

•experience delays or interruptions to preclinical studies, clinical trials, our receipt of services from our third-party service providers on whom we rely, or our supply chain due to the effects of health epidemics and pandemics, such as COVID-19;

•seek regulatory approvals for any product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials;

•commercialize bexotegrast, our other product candidates and any future product candidates, if approved;

•increase the amount of research and development activities to identify and develop product candidates;

•hire additional clinical development, quality control, scientific and management personnel;

•expand our operational, financial and management systems and increase personnel, including personnel to support our clinical development and manufacturing efforts;

•establish a sales, marketing, medical affairs and distribution infrastructure to commercialize any products for which we may obtain marketing approval and intend to commercialize on our own or jointly with third parties;

•maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio;

•invest in or in-license other technologies or product candidates; and

•continue to build out our organization to engage in such activities.

To become and remain profitable, we must develop and eventually commercialize products with significant market potential. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including completing preclinical studies

and clinical trials, obtaining marketing approval for product candidates, manufacturing, marketing, and selling products for which we may obtain marketing approval and satisfying any post-marketing requirements. We may never succeed in any or all of these activities and, even if we do, we may never generate revenue that is significant enough to achieve profitability. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business, or continue our operations.

We will require substantial additional capital to fund our operations. If we are unable to raise such capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce and/or eliminate one or more of our research and drug development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations.

Developing biopharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive, and uncertain process that takes years to complete. Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of our product candidates and any future product candidates that we may develop, seek regulatory approvals for our product candidates and to launch and commercialize any products for which we receive regulatory approval. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in order to maintain our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we may be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate one or more of our research and drug development programs or future commercialization efforts.

As of December 31, 2024, we had approximately $357.2 million in cash, cash equivalents, restricted cash and short-term investments. Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will be sufficient to fund our anticipated operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements for the next 12 months and beyond. However, our future capital requirements and the period for which our existing resources will support our operations may vary significantly from what we expect, and we will in any event require additional capital in order to complete clinical development of any of our current programs. Our monthly spending levels will vary based on new and ongoing development and corporate activities. Because the length of time and activities associated with development of our product candidates is highly uncertain, we are unable to estimate the actual funds we will require for development, marketing, and commercialization activities. Our future funding requirements, both near and long-term, will depend on many factors, including, but not limited to:

•the initiation, progress, timing, costs and results of preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates;

•the clinical development plans we establish for these product candidates;

•the timelines of our clinical trials and the overall costs to conduct and complete the clinical trials, including any increased costs due to disruptions caused by marketplace conditions, including the effects of health epidemics and pandemics, such as COVID-19, or other geopolitical conditions;

•the cost and capital commitments required for developing manufacturing processes for our product candidates and manufacturing our product candidates at clinical and commercial scales;

•the number and characteristics of product candidates that we develop;

•the outcome, timing and cost of meeting regulatory requirements established by the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities;

•whether we are able to enter into future collaboration agreements and the terms of any such agreements;

•the ability to and timing of achieving a favorable pricing and reimbursement decision by the pricing authorities in the markets of interest;

•the ability to secure a position recommendation following the health technology assessment by the health technology bodies in the relevant market;

•the cost of filing, prosecuting, defending and enforcing our patent claims and other intellectual property rights;

•the cost of defending intellectual property disputes, including patent infringement actions brought by third parties against us or our product candidates;

•the effect of competing technological and market developments;

•the cost and timing of completion of commercial-scale outsourced manufacturing activities; and

•the cost of establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities for any product candidates for which we may receive regulatory approval in regions where we choose to commercialize our products on our own.

We have borrowed and in the future may borrow additional capital from institutional and commercial banking sources to fund future growth or potentially pursuant to new arrangements with different lenders. We have borrowed capital under our Amended and Restated Loan and Security Agreement with Oxford Finance LLC, or Amended Loan Agreement. Following our discontinuation of BEACON-IPF, we do not expect to be eligible to borrow additional term loans under the Amended Loan Agreement, given that the availability of two term loans is subject to the satisfaction of certain conditions related to the BEACON-IPF clinical trial and the availability of the third term loan is at the sole discretion of the lender. In addition, we expect to continue to opportunistically seek access to the equity capital markets to support our development efforts and operations. However, we cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Until we can generate sufficient revenue to finance our cash requirements, which we may never do, we expect to finance our future cash needs through a combination of public or private equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances, licensing arrangements and other marketing or distribution arrangements. If we raise additional funds through public or private equity offerings, the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our common stockholders. Further, to the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of common stock or securities convertible or exchangeable into common stock, your ownership interest will be diluted. In addition, any debt financing may subject us to fixed payment obligations and covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, or declaring dividends. If we raise additional capital through marketing and distribution arrangements or other collaborations, strategic alliances, or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish certain valuable intellectual property or other rights to our product candidates, technologies, future revenue streams or research programs or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. We also may be required to seek collaborators for any of our product candidates at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable or relinquish our rights to product candidates or technologies that we otherwise would seek to develop or commercialize ourselves. Market volatility resulting from challenging financial markets factors, including the effects of health epidemics and pandemics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, could also adversely impact our ability to access capital as and when needed. If we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of one or more of our product candidates or one or more of our other research and development initiatives. Any of the above events could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations and cause the price of our common stock to decline.

Covenants and other provisions in the Amended Loan Agreement restrict our business and operations in many ways, and if we do not effectively manage our covenants, our financial conditions and results of operations could be adversely affected. In addition, our operations may not provide sufficient cash to meet the repayment obligations of our debt incurred under the Amended Loan Agreement.

Pursuant to the Amended Loan Agreement, Oxford has been granted a security interest in substantially all of our assets, excluding intellectual property (but including the right to payments and proceeds of intellectual property, with such exclusion of intellectual property subject to change pursuant to the terms of the Amended Loan Agreement), and a negative pledge on substantially all of our intellectual property, subject to customary exceptions. If an event of default occurs under the Amended Loan Agreement, Oxford may foreclose on its security interest and liquidate some or all of these assets, which would harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.

In the event of a default in connection with our bankruptcy, insolvency, liquidation, or reorganization, Oxford would have a prior right to substantially all of our assets to the exclusion of our general unsecured creditors. Only after satisfying the claims of Oxford and any unsecured creditors would any amount be available for our equity holders.

The pledge of these assets and other restrictions imposed in the Amended Loan Agreement may limit our flexibility in raising capital for other purposes. Because substantially all of our assets are pledged to secure the Amended Loan Agreement obligations, our ability to incur additional indebtedness or to sell or dispose of assets to raise capital may be impaired, which could have an adverse effect on our financial flexibility.

In addition, if we are unable to comply with certain financial and operating restrictions in the Amended Loan Agreement, we may be limited in our business activities and access to credit or may default under the Amended Loan Agreement. Provisions in the Amended Loan Agreement impose certain restrictions or require prior approval on our ability, and the ability of certain of our subsidiaries to, among other things:

•Incur additional debt;

•Make certain investments and acquisitions;

•Guarantee the indebtedness of others or our subsidiaries;

•Create liens or encumbrances;

•Engage in new lines of business;

•Enter into transactions with affiliates;

•Pay cash dividends and make distributions;

•Redeem or repurchase capital shares;

•Sell, lease or transfer certain parts of our business or property, including equity interests of our subsidiaries;

•Prepay other indebtedness; and

•Acquire new companies and merge or consolidate.

The Amended Loan Agreement also contains other customary covenants. We may not be able to comply with these covenants in the future. Our failure to comply with these covenants may result in the declaration of an event of default, which, if not cured or waived, may result in the acceleration of the maturity of indebtedness outstanding under the Amended Loan Agreement and would require us to pay all amounts outstanding. If the maturity of our indebtedness is accelerated, we may not have sufficient funds then available for repayment or we may not have the ability to borrow or obtain sufficient funds to replace the accelerated indebtedness on terms acceptable to us or at all. Our failure to repay our obligations under the Amended Loan Agreement would result in Oxford foreclosing on all or a portion of our assets, which could force us to curtail or cease our operations.

The amount of our future losses is uncertain and our quarterly operating results may fluctuate significantly or may fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, each of which may cause our stock price to fluctuate or decline.

Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly in the future due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including the following:

•the timing and success or failure of clinical trials for our product candidates or competing product candidates, or any other change in the competitive landscape of our industry, including consolidation among our competitors or partners;

•our ability to successfully recruit and retain subjects for clinical trials, and any delays caused by difficulties in such efforts;

•our ability to obtain marketing approval for our product candidates, and the timing and scope of any such approvals we may receive;

•the timing and cost of, and level of investment in, research and development activities relating to our product candidates, which may change from time to time;

•the cost of manufacturing our product candidates, which may vary depending on the difficulty of manufacture, quantity of production and the terms of our agreements with manufacturers;

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

•expenditures that we will or may incur to develop additional product candidates;

•the level of demand for our product candidates should they receive approval, which may vary significantly;

•the risk/benefit profile, cost and reimbursement policies with respect to our product candidates, if approved, and existing and potential future therapeutics that compete with our product candidates;

•general market conditions or extraordinary external events, such as recessions or the effects of health epidemics and pandemics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic;

•the changing and volatile U.S. and global economic and political environments; and

•future accounting pronouncements or changes in our accounting policies.

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of

analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated guidance we may provide.

Risks Related to Research and Development and the Biopharmaceutical Industry

We have a limited operating history, which may make it difficult to evaluate our prospects and likelihood of success.

We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. Our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing our company, business planning, raising capital, establishing our intellectual property portfolio and performing research and development of our product candidates and our technology related to transforming growth factor beta, or TGF-β, signaling and integrin biology, medicinal chemistry, translational screening technologies, and clinical insights to discover and develop novel therapies for the treatment of fibrosis. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value. We have not yet demonstrated the ability to progress any product candidate through clinical trials, obtain regulatory approval, manufacture a commercial scale product, or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. In March 2025, we announced that we were discontinuing the BEACON-IPF Phase 2b trial following a prespecified data review and recommendation by the trial’s independent DSMB, as well as a secondary review and recommendation by an outside expert panel. In addition, as a business with a limited operating history, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors and risks frequently experienced by early-stage biopharmaceutical companies in rapidly evolving fields. Consequently, we expect our operating results to continue to fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year due to a variety of factors, many of which are beyond our control, and predictions about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing drug products.

Our business is highly dependent on the success of our lead product candidate, bexotegrast and any other product candidates that we advance into the clinic. Our product candidates will require significant additional development before we may be able to seek regulatory approval for and launch a product commercially.

We are currently conducting a Phase 1 clinical trial of PLN-101095 in solid tumors, and PLN-101325 development for treatment of muscular dystrophies is Phase-1 ready. We have no products that are approved for commercial sale and may never be able to develop marketable products. If any of our product candidates encounter safety or efficacy problems, development delays, regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business would be significantly harmed. In that regard, in March 2025, we announced that we were discontinuing the BEACON-IPF Phase 2b trial following a prespecified data review and recommendation by the trial’s independent DSMB, as well as a secondary review and recommendation by an outside expert panel.

Before we can generate any revenue from sales of bexotegrast or any of our other product candidates, we must undergo additional preclinical and clinical development, regulatory review, and approval in one or more jurisdictions. In addition, if one or more of our product candidates are approved, we must ensure access to sufficient commercial manufacturing capacity and conduct significant marketing efforts in connection with any commercial launch. These efforts will require substantial investment, and we may not have the financial resources to continue development of our product candidates.

We may experience setbacks that could delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or the extent of regulatory protection or our ability to commercialize, our product candidates, including:

•negative or inconclusive results from our preclinical studies or clinical trials or the clinical trials of others for product candidates similar to ours, leading to a decision or requirement to conduct additional preclinical testing or clinical trials or abandon a program;

•product-related side effects experienced by subjects in our clinical trials or by individuals using drugs or therapeutics similar to our product candidates;

•delays in submitting investigational new drug (IND) applications or comparable foreign applications or delays or failure in obtaining the necessary approvals from regulators to commence a clinical trial, or a suspension or termination of a clinical trial once commenced;

•conditions imposed by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities regarding the scope or design of our clinical trials;

•delays in enrolling subjects in clinical trials, including due to operational challenges, competition with other clinical trials or the effects of health epidemics and pandemics, such as the COVID-19 pandemic;

•high drop-out rates or screening failures of subjects from clinical trials;

•inadequate supply or quality of product candidates or other materials necessary for the conduct of our clinical trials;

•challenges manufacturing our product candidates to regulatory requirements in a cost effective manner;

•greater than anticipated clinical trial costs;

•inability to compete with other therapies;

•failure to secure or maintain orphan designation in some jurisdictions;

•poor efficacy of our product candidates during clinical trials;

•unfavorable FDA or other regulatory agency inspection and review of a clinical trial site;

•failure of our third-party contractors or investigators to comply with regulatory requirements or otherwise meet their contractual obligations in a timely manner, or at all;

•delays and changes in regulatory requirements, policy and guidelines, including the imposition of additional regulatory oversight around clinical testing generally or with respect to our technology in particular; or

•varying interpretations of data by the FDA and similar foreign regulatory agencies.

We do not have complete control over many of these factors, including certain aspects of clinical development and the regulatory submission process, potential threats to our intellectual property rights and our manufacturing, marketing, distribution and sales efforts or that of any future collaborator.

Our approach to drug discovery and development in the area of fibrotic diseases, with an initial focus on tissue-specific integrin modulation and TGF-β signaling inhibition, is unproven and may not result in marketable products.

Our approach is designed to discover and develop targeted treatments for fibrosis with an initial focus on the antagonism of tissue-specific TGF-β signaling through the inhibition of integrins known to mediate the release of activated TGF-β in fibrotic tissue. However, this mechanism has not been definitively proven to successfully treat fibrosis. Targeting integrins to treat fibrosis is a novel approach in a rapidly developing field, and there can be no assurance that we will not experience currently unknown problems or delays in developing our product candidates, that such problems or delays will not result in unanticipated costs, or that any such development problems can be solved. As a result, we may never succeed in developing a marketable product.

Clinical development involves a lengthy, complex, and expensive process, with an uncertain outcome.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. In particular, the general approach for FDA approval of a new drug is dispositive data from two well-controlled, Phase 3 clinical trials of the relevant drug in the relevant patient population. Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve hundreds of patients, have significant costs and take years to complete. A product candidate can fail at any stage of testing, even after observing promising signals of activity in earlier preclinical studies or earlier stage clinical trials. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. For example, in March 2025, we announced that we were discontinuing the BEACON-IPF Phase 2b trial following a prespecified data review and recommendation by the trial’s independent DSMB, as well as a secondary review and recommendation by an outside expert panel. In addition, initial success in clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when such trials are completed. There is typically an extremely high rate of attrition from the failure of product candidates proceeding through clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy profile despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. A large 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 or divergent conclusions by the FDA, other regulatory agencies, IRBs, DSMBs or others in connection with such findings.

Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved as products and there can be no assurance that any of our future clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of bexotegrast or any of our other product candidates. Product candidates that appear promising in the early phases of development may fail to reach the market for several reasons, including:

•preclinical studies or clinical trials may show the product candidates to be less effective than expected (e.g., a clinical trial could fail to meet its primary endpoint(s)) or to have unacceptable side effects or toxicities;

•failure to establish clinical endpoints that applicable regulatory authorities would consider clinically meaningful;

•failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals;

•development of competing products in the same disease state;

•manufacturing costs, formulation issues, pricing or reimbursement issues, or other factors that make a product candidate uneconomical;

•failure or inability to perform by our third party vendors, including vendors in foreign jurisdictions including China; and

•the proprietary rights of others and their competing products and technologies that may prevent one of our product candidates from being commercialized.

In addition, differences in trial design between early-stage clinical trials and later-stage clinical trials make it difficult to extrapolate the results of earlier clinical trials to later clinical trials. Further, as we rely on novel technologies including sophisticated imaging technologies to generate data relating to our clinical endpoints, there is an increased risk that we may not properly measure, analyze or interpret this data. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. Additionally, some of our trials are open label studies, where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Most typically, open label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes do so at different dose levels. Open label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients in open label clinical trials are aware when they are receiving treatment. In addition, open label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. Therefore, it is possible that positive results observed in open label trials will not be replicated in later placebo-controlled trials.

In addition, the standards that the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities use when regulating us require judgment and can change, which makes it difficult to predict with certainty how they will be applied. Although we are initially focusing our efforts on development of small molecule drug products, we are also commencing the development of biological products, including a potential candidate for muscular dystrophies, which could make us subject to additional regulatory requirements. Any analysis we perform of data from preclinical and clinical activities is subject to confirmation and interpretation by regulatory authorities, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. We may also encounter unexpected delays or increased costs due to new government regulations or changes in regulatory policy as a result of judicial challenges. Examples of such regulations and changes include future legislation or administrative action, or changes in FDA policy during the period of product development and FDA regulatory review. It is impossible to predict whether legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA or foreign regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes, if any, may be. The FDA may also require a panel of experts, referred to as an Advisory Committee, to deliberate on the adequacy of the safety and efficacy data to support approval. The opinion of the Advisory Committee, although not binding, may have a significant impact on our ability to obtain approval of any product candidates that we develop.

We must comply with numerous foreign regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing and marketing authorization, and if approved for marketing, pricing and third-party reimbursement. The foreign regulatory approval process varies among countries and may include all of the risks associated with FDA approval described above as well as risks attributable to the satisfaction of local regulations in foreign jurisdictions. Moreover, the time required to obtain approval may differ from that required to obtain FDA approval. Approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities outside the United States and vice versa.

Successful completion of clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting a marketing application to the FDA and similar marketing applications to comparable foreign regulatory authorities, for each product candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any product candidates. We may experience negative or inconclusive results, which may result in our deciding, or our being required by regulators, to conduct additional clinical studies or trials or abandon some or all of our product development programs, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

We may incur additional costs or experience delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of bexotegrast or any other product candidates.

We may experience delays in initiating or completing clinical trials. We also may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any future clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize bexotegrast or any other product candidates, including:

•regulators, IRBs, or ethics committees may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;

•the FDA or other comparable regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design, including with respect to dosing levels administered in our planned clinical trials, which may delay or prevent us from initiating our clinical trials with our originally intended trial design;

•we may experience delays in reaching, or fail to reach, agreement on acceptable terms with prospective trial sites and prospective contract research organizations, or CROs, which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;

•the number of subjects required for clinical trials of any product candidates may be larger than we anticipate or subjects may drop out of these clinical trials or fail to return for post-treatment follow-up at a higher rate than we anticipate;

•our third-party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, or may deviate from the clinical trial protocol or drop out of the trial, which may require that we add new clinical trial sites or investigators;

•we may experience delays or interruptions to our manufacturing supply chain, or we could suffer delays in reaching, or we may fail to reach, agreement on acceptable terms with third-party service providers on whom we rely;

•additional delays and interruptions to our clinical trials could extend the duration of the trials and increase the overall costs to finish the trials as our fixed costs are not substantially reduced during delays;

•we may elect to, or regulators, IRBs, DSMBs, or ethics committees may require that we or our investigators suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;

•we may not have the financial resources available to begin and complete the planned trials, or the cost of clinical trials of any product candidates may be greater than we anticipate;

•the supply or quality of our product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of our product candidates may be insufficient or inadequate to initiate or complete a given clinical trial; and

•the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to submit additional data such as long-term toxicology studies, or impose other requirements before permitting us to initiate a clinical trial.

Our product development costs will increase if we experience additional delays in clinical testing or in obtaining marketing approvals. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. If we do not achieve our product development goals in the timeframes we announce and expect, the approval and commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed or prevented entirely. In addition, significant clinical trial delays could shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, potentially impairing our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and harming our business and results of operations. Any delays in our clinical development programs may harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations significantly.

Our ongoing and future clinical trials may reveal significant adverse events or unexpected drug-drug interactions not seen in our preclinical studies and may result in a safety profile that could delay or prevent regulatory approval or market acceptance of any of our product candidates.

If significant adverse events or other side effects are observed in any of our ongoing or future clinical trials, we may have difficulty recruiting patients to our clinical trials, patients may drop out of our trials, or we may be required to abandon the trials or our development efforts altogether. In March 2025, we announced that we were discontinuing the BEACON-IPF Phase 2b trial following a prespecified data review and recommendation by the trial’s independent DSMB, as well as a secondary review and recommendation by an outside expert panel due to an imbalance in safety events between treatment and placebo groups. We may also encounter unexpected drug-drug interactions in our ongoing or

planned trials, and may be required to further test our candidates, including additional drug-drug interaction studies, which may be expensive, time-consuming and result in delays to our programs.

Some potential therapeutics developed in the biopharmaceutical industry that initially showed therapeutic promise in early-stage trials have later been found to cause side effects that prevented their further development. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining marketing approval, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance of the approved product due to its tolerability versus other therapies.

If we encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected.

We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons. 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. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including:

•the patient eligibility and exclusion criteria defined in the protocol;

•the size of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints and the process for identifying patients;

•the willingness or availability of patients to participate in our trials ;

•the proximity of patients to trial sites;

•the design of the trial;

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

•clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and risks of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new products that may be approved for the indications we are investigating or other studies enrolling for similar diseases;

•the availability of competing commercially available therapies and other competing product candidates’ clinical trials;

•our ability to obtain and maintain patient informed consents; and

•the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of the trials before completion.

For example, we are initially developing bexotegrast for the treatment of IPF and PSC, each of which is an orphan indication. In the United States, IPF is estimated to affect approximately 150,000 patients, while PSC is estimated to affect approximately 30,000 to 45,000 patients. As a result, we may encounter difficulties enrolling subjects in our clinical trials of bexotegrast due, in part, to the small size of these patient populations. Our clinical trials compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials in such clinical trial site.

Additionally, the FDA may modify or enhance trial requirements, which may affect enrollment. For example, in August 2023, the FDA published a guidance document, “Informed Consent, Guidance for IRBs, Clinical Investigators, and Sponsors,” which supersedes past guidance and finalizes draft guidance on informed consent. Further, in December 2023, FDA published a final rule, “Institutional Review Board Waiver or Alteration of Informed Consent for Minimal Risk Clinical Investigations,” which allows exceptions from informed consent requirements when a clinical investigation poses no more than minimal risk to the human subject and includes appropriate safeguards to protect the rights, safety, and welfare of human subjects. The FDA’s new guidance and rulemaking present evolving requirements for informed consent which may affect recruitment and retention of patients in clinical trials. Effects on recruitment and retention of patients may hinder or delay a clinical trial and could cause a significant setback to an applicable program.

The design or execution of our ongoing and future clinical trials may not support marketing approval.

The design or execution of a clinical trial can determine whether its results will support marketing approval, and flaws in the design or execution of a clinical trial may not become apparent until the clinical trial is well advanced.

Additionally, in some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different trials with the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including differences in trial protocols, size and type of the

patient populations, variable adherence to the dosing regimen or other protocol requirements and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. We do not know whether any clinical trials we conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety to obtain marketing approval to market our product candidates. For example, in March 2025, we announced that we were discontinuing the BEACON-IPF Phase 2b trial following a prespecified data review and recommendation by the trial’s independent DSMB, as well as a secondary review and recommendation by an outside expert panel.

Further, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and in determining when or whether marketing approval will be obtained for any of our product candidates. Our product candidates may not be approved even if they achieve their primary endpoints in future Phase 3 clinical trials or registrational trials. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our trial designs and our interpretation of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, including by the FDA, comparable foreign regulatory authorities, IRBs or DSMBs interpreting such data. Further, requirements regarding clinical trial data may evolve. In June 2023, the FDA published draft guidance, which seeks to unify standards for clinical trial data for International Council for Harmonisation of Technical Requirements of Pharmaceuticals for Human Use, or ICH member countries and regions. Changes to data requirements may cause the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to disagree with data from preclinical studies or clinical trials, and may require further studies.

In addition, any of these regulatory authorities may change requirements for the approval of a product candidate even after reviewing and providing comments or advice on a protocol for a pivotal Phase 3 or registrational clinical trial. Further, any of these regulatory authorities may also approve a product candidate for fewer or more limited indications than we request or may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly post-marketing clinical trials. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not approve the labeling claims that we believe would be necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of our product candidates, if approved.

Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of our future clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates.

Although we have received U.S. orphan drug designation for bexotegrast for IPF and PSC indications and EEA orphan drug designation for bexotegrast for IPF and for PSC we may be unable to obtain and maintain orphan drug designation for our other product candidates and, even if we obtain such designation, we may not be able to realize the benefits of such designation, including potential marketing exclusivity of our product candidates, if approved.

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and other major markets, may designate drugs intended to treat conditions or diseases affecting relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the FDA, may designate a product candidate as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as having a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In order to obtain orphan designation in the European Economic Area (EEA) and the U.K., the product must fulfill certain challenging criteria. Under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 141/2000 in the EU, and Regulation 50G of the Human Medicines Regulation 2012 in the U.K., a medicinal product may be designated as an orphan medicinal product if it meets the following criteria: (1) such product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either the prevalence of such condition must not be more than five in 10,000 persons in the territory of the EU or U.K. (as applicable) when the application is made, or without the benefits derived from orphan status, it must be unlikely that the marketing of the medicine would generate sufficient return in the EU or U.K. to justify the investment needed for its development; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU or U.K. or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition, as defined in Regulation (EC) 847/2000. In the EEA, the grant of the orphan designation does not mean that the product will be granted orphan status at the time it is assessed in parallel with the application for a marketing authorization. The authorities reassess then whether the product still fulfills the criteria for orphan status.

Although we have received U.S. orphan drug designation for bexotegrast for IPF and PSC and EEA orphan drug designation for bexotegrast for IPF and for PSC, we may be unable to obtain and maintain orphan drug designation for our other product candidates, and even if we obtain such designation, the designation of any of our product candidates as an orphan drug does not mean that any regulatory agency will accelerate regulatory review of, or ultimately approve, that product candidate, nor does it limit the ability of any regulatory agency to grant orphan drug designation to product candidates of other companies that treat the same indications as our product candidates.

Generally, if a product candidate with an orphan drug designation receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities from approving another marketing application for a product that constitutes a similar medicinal product treating the same indication for that marketing exclusivity period, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and ten years in the EEA. The ten-year period of market exclusivity in the EEA can be extended by a further two years if the product qualifies for a pediatric extension, but can be reduced to a period of six years if the orphan designation criteria are no longer met after the fifth year. Orphan drug exclusivity may be revoked if any regulatory agency determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. On April 26, 2023, the European Commission adopted a proposal for a new Regulation set to replace Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 and a new Directive replacing Directive 2001/83 on the Community Code relating to medicinal products for human use. If made into law, this proposal will revise and replace the existing general pharmaceutical legislation and may make it more difficult to obtain orphan designation in the EEA.

Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product candidate from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition in the United States or EEA. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or EMA, as applicable, may subsequently approve another drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the latter drug is not a similar medicinal product or is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care.

In addition, Congress is considering updates to the orphan drug provisions of the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, in response to a recent decision by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit. Any changes to the orphan drug provisions could change our opportunities for, or likelihood of success in obtaining, orphan drug exclusivity and would materially adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

A Fast Track designation by the FDA, even if granted for other current or future product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may seek Fast Track designation for one or more of our future product candidates. In April 2022, bexotegrast received Fast Track designation for the treatment of IPF. If a drug product is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and it demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition, the drug sponsor may apply for FDA Fast Track designation for a particular indication. We may seek Fast Track designation for our product candidates, but there is no assurance that the FDA will grant this designation to any of our proposed product candidates. Marketing applications submitted by sponsors of products in Fast Track development may qualify for priority review under the policies and procedures offered by the FDA, but the Fast Track designation does not assure any such qualification or ultimate marketing licensure by the FDA. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant Fast Track designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, there can be no assurance that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or licensure compared to conventional FDA procedures or pathways and receiving a Fast Track designation does not provide assurance of ultimate FDA licensure. In addition, the FDA may withdraw Fast Track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. In addition, the FDA may withdraw any Fast Track designation at any time.

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

As product candidates progress through preclinical to late-stage clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield, manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. 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 conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates and generate revenue.

In addition, there are risks associated with large scale manufacturing for clinical trials or commercial scale including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, compliance with good manufacturing practices, lot consistency and timely availability of raw materials. Even if we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that our manufacturers will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential commercial launch of the product or to meet potential

future demand. Additionally, if we advance a biological candidate into IND-enabling studies, the manufacturing processes for biological products is more complex and expensive than with small molecule products and additional manufacturing suppliers may be needed to manufacture clinical supplies for these programs. If our manufacturers are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects.

We may not be successful in our efforts to identify or discover additional product candidates in the future.

Our research programs may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development for a number of reasons, including:

•our inability to design such product candidates with the pharmacological properties that we desire or attractive pharmacokinetics; or

•potential product candidates may, on further study, be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be medicines that will receive marketing approval and achieve market acceptance.

Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial, and human resources. If we are unable to identify suitable compounds for preclinical and clinical development, we will not be able to obtain product revenue in future periods, which likely would result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely impact our stock price.

Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must make decisions on the allocation of resources to certain programs and product candidates; these decisions may prove to be wrong and may adversely affect our business.

We have limited financial and human resources and intend to initially focus on research programs and product candidates for a limited set of indications. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential or a greater likelihood of success. In addition, we seek to accelerate our development timelines, including by initiating certain clinical trials of our product candidates, including our adaptive trial, before earlier-stage studies have been completed. This approach may cause us to commit significant resources to prepare for and conduct later-stage trials for one or more product candidates that subsequently fail earlier-stage clinical testing. Therefore, our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities or expend resources on product candidates that are not viable.

There can be no assurance that we will ever be able to identify additional therapeutic opportunities for our product candidates or to develop suitable potential product candidates through internal research programs, which could materially adversely affect our future growth and prospects. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential product candidates or other potential programs that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful.

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

We face an inherent risk of product liability as a result of testing bexotegrast and any of our other product candidates in clinical trials and will face an even greater risk 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 trials, 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 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:

•inability to bring a product candidate to the market;

•decreased demand for our products;

•injury to our reputation;

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

•initiation of investigations by regulators;

•fines, injunctions or criminal penalties;

•costs to defend the related litigation;

•diversion of management’s time and our resources;

•substantial monetary awards to trial participants;

•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, if approved; and

•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. We will need to obtain additional insurance for clinical trials as bexotegrast and other product candidates continue clinical development and as additional product candidates may enter the clinic. However, we may be unable to obtain, or may obtain on unfavorable terms, clinical trial insurance in amounts adequate to cover any liabilities from any of our clinical trials. Our insurance policies may also 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.

We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing, or commercializing products before or more successfully than us.

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 biopharmaceutical companies, specialty biopharmaceutical 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 biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that are currently pursuing the development of products for the treatment of fibrosis. Companies that we are aware of that are targeting the treatment of various fibrosis indications through inhibiting various parts of the TGF-β pathway include companies with significant financial resources such as AbbVie Inc., AstraZeneca plc, Bristol Myers Squibb Co., Corbus Pharmaceutical, Merck & Co., Inc., Eli Lily & Company Novartis AG, Scholar Rock, Inc., and Takeda Pharmaceutical Company.

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 biopharmaceutical 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 programs. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, more convenient or less expensive than any products that we may develop. Furthermore, products currently approved for other indications could be discovered to be effective treatments of fibrosis as well, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over bexotegrast or other product candidates that we may identify. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Additionally, products or technologies developed by our competitors may render our potential product candidates uneconomical or obsolete and we may not be successful in marketing any product candidates we may develop against competitors. The availability of competitive products could limit the demand, and the price we are able to charge, for any products that we may develop and commercialize.

The biopharmaceutical industry is subject to extensive regulatory obligations and policies that may be subject to significant and abrupt change, including due to judicial challenges, election cycles, and resulting regulatory updates and changes in policy priorities.

In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court issued an opinion holding that courts reviewing agency action pursuant to the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) “must exercise their independent judgment” and “may not defer to an agency interpretation of the law simply because a statute is ambiguous.” The decision will have a significant impact on how lower courts evaluate challenges to agency interpretations of law, including those by the FDA, HHS, CMS and other agencies with significant oversight of the biopharmaceutical industry.The new framework is likely to increase both the frequency of such challenges and their odds of success by eliminating one way in which the government previously prevailed in such cases. As a result, significant regulatory policies will be subject to increased litigation and judicial scrutiny.

In addition, federal agency priorities, leadership, policies, rulemaking, communications, spending, and staffing may be significantly impacted by election cycles. For example, the current U.S. presidential administration has committed to significantly reduce government spending through cuts to federal healthcare programs and reductions in the workforces of key government agencies, such as HHS, FDA, and CMS.Efforts by the current administration to limit federal agency budgets or personnel may result in reductions to agency budgets, employees, and operations, which may lead to slower response times and longer review periods, potentially affecting our ability to progress development of our product candidates or obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates.

Risks Related to Marketing, Reimbursement, Healthcare Regulations and Ongoing Regulatory Compliance

Even if a product candidate we develop receives marketing approval, it may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success.

Even if bexotegrast or any other product candidate we develop receives marketing approval, it may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients and third-party payors. In addition, the availability of coverage by third-party payors may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures designed to reduce the cost of health care. If the product candidates we develop do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenues and we may not become profitable.

The degree of market acceptance of any product candidate, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including:

•efficacy and potential advantages compared to alternative treatments;

•the ability to offer our products, if approved, for sale at competitive prices;

•convenience and ease of administration compared to alternative treatments;

•the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies;

•the recommendations with respect to our product candidates in guidelines published by various scientific organizations applicable to us and our product candidates;

•positive HTA assessment in jurisdictions where required;

•the strength of marketing and distribution support;

•the ability to obtain sufficient third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement and a positive recommendation by health technology bodies; and

•the prevalence and severity of any side effects.

If government and other third-party payors do not provide coverage and adequate reimbursement levels for any products we commercialize, market acceptance and commercial success would be reduced.

Coverage and reimbursement may be limited or unavailable or pricing unfavorable in certain market segments for our product candidates, if approved, which could make it difficult for us to sell any product candidates profitably.

Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. In the United States, sales of any products for which we may receive regulatory marketing approval will depend, in part, on the availability of coverage and adequacy of reimbursement from third-party payors. Third-party payors include government authorities such as Medicare, Medicaid, TRICARE, and the Veterans Administration, managed care providers, private health insurers, and other organizations. Patients who are provided medical treatment for their

conditions generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their treatment. Coverage and adequate reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, and commercial payors are critical to new product acceptance. Patients are unlikely to use our product candidates unless coverage is provided, and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost. We cannot be sure that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be available for any product that we may develop and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be.

Government authorities and other third-party payors decide which drugs and treatments they will cover and the amount of reimbursement. Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a product is:

•a covered benefit under its health plan;

•safe, effective and medically necessary;

•appropriate for the specific patient;

•cost-effective; and

•neither experimental nor investigational.

In the United States as well as foreign jurisdictions, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors.

Coverage and reimbursement for products may vary depending on the payor, the insurance plan, and other factors. As a result, obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our products on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product, the resulting reimbursement payment rates might not be adequate for us to achieve or sustain profitability or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Additionally, third-party payors may not cover, or provide adequate reimbursement for, long-term follow-up evaluations required following the use of product candidates, once approved. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates, if approved.

A primary trend in the United States and European health care industries is toward cost containment, as legislative bodies, government authorities, third-party payors, and others have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage, pricing and the amount of reimbursement available for certain treatments. Such third-party payors, including Medicare, may question the coverage of, and challenge or seek to lower the prices charged for medical products, and many third-party payors limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved health care products. Moreover, reimbursement, if available, may vary according to the use of the product and the clinical setting in which it is used, may be based on reimbursement levels already set for lower cost products and may be incorporated into existing payments for other services. Net prices for products may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors or by future laws, regulations, or guidance seeking to limit prescription drug prices. If we are unable to promptly obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement rates from both government-funded and private payors for any approved products that we develop, or if net prices are reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates, there could be a material adverse effect on our operating results, our ability to raise capital needed to commercialize products and our overall financial condition.

Changes to current healthcare laws and state and federal healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future that impact coverage and reimbursement for drug or biologic products may result in additional payment reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding and otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used. For additional details regarding healthcare reform measures, see the discussion in the risk factor under the heading “Ongoing healthcare legislative and regulatory reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.”

Even if we obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates, we may never obtain approval or commercialize such products outside of the United States, which would limit our ability to realize their full market potential.

In order to market any products outside of the United States, we must establish and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries regarding safety and efficacy. Clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries, and regulatory approval in one country does not mean that regulatory approval will be obtained in any other country. Approval procedures vary among countries and can involve additional product testing and validation and additional administrative review periods. Seeking foreign regulatory

approvals could result in significant delays, difficulties, and costs for us and may require additional preclinical studies or clinical trials which would be costly and time consuming. Regulatory requirements can vary widely from country to country and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in those countries. Satisfying these and other regulatory requirements is costly, time consuming, uncertain and subject to unanticipated delays. In addition, our failure to obtain regulatory approval in any country may delay or have negative effects on the process for regulatory approval in other countries. We do not have any product candidates approved for sale in any jurisdiction, including international markets, and we do not have experience in obtaining regulatory approval in international markets. If we fail to comply with regulatory requirements in international markets or to obtain and maintain required approvals, our ability to realize the full market potential of our products will be harmed.

We currently have no marketing and sales organization and have no experience as a company in commercializing products, and we may have to invest significant resources to develop these capabilities. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may not be able to generate product revenue.

We have no internal sales, marketing, or distribution capabilities, nor have we commercialized a product. If any of our product candidates ultimately receives regulatory approval, we expect to establish a marketing and sales organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize each such product in major markets, which will be expensive and time consuming. We have no prior experience as a company in the marketing, sale and distribution of pharmaceutical products and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. We may also choose to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. We may not be able to enter into collaborations or hire consultants or external service providers to assist us in sales, marketing and distribution functions on acceptable financial terms, or at all. In addition, our product revenues and our profitability, if any, may be lower if we rely on third parties for these functions than if we were to market, sell and distribute any products that we develop ourselves. We likely will 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 are not successful in commercializing our products, either on our own or through arrangements with one or more third parties, we may not be able to generate any future product revenue and we would incur significant additional losses.

Our relationships with healthcare providers, physicians, third-party payors, and other potential referral sources will be subject to applicable anti-kickback, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm and diminished profits and future earnings.

Healthcare providers, physicians, third-party payors, and other potential referral sources in the United States and elsewhere play a primary role in the distribution, recommendation and prescription of biopharmaceutical products. Arrangements with third-party payors and customers can expose biopharmaceutical manufacturers to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, as detailed in Part I, Item 1 - Business - Government Regulation - Other Healthcare Laws of this Report. In particular, the research of our product candidates, as well as the promotion, sales and marketing of healthcare items and services, and certain 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, marketing and promotion, structuring and commission(s), certain customer incentive programs, remuneration provided to health care professionals and their affiliates, charitable donations, interactions with entities excluded from participation in government healthcare 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.

The distribution of biopharmaceutical products is subject to additional requirements and regulations, including extensive record-keeping, licensing, storage and security requirements intended to prevent the unauthorized sale of biopharmaceutical products.

The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment. Ensuring business arrangements comply with applicable healthcare laws can be time- and resource-consuming.

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, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, reputational harm, possible exclusion from participation in federal and state funded healthcare programs, contractual damages and the curtailment or restricting of our operations, as well as additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws. Further, if any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs. Any action for violation of these laws, even if successfully defended, could cause a biopharmaceutical manufacturer to incur significant legal expenses and divert management’s attention from the operation of the business. Prohibitions or restrictions on sales or withdrawal of future marketed products could materially affect business in an adverse way.

Even if we receive regulatory approval of any product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory 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 or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates.

If any of our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies, pharmacovigilance, 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. In addition, we will be subject to continued compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice, or cGMP, and GCP requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval.

Manufacturers and their facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, 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 marketing application, and previous responses to inspection observations. 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 may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The FDA may also require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, or REMS, program as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could entail requirements for long-term patient follow-up, a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves our product candidates, we will have to comply with requirements including submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration.

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

•restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of our products, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary or mandatory product recalls;

•fines, warning letters or holds on clinical trials;

•refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or suspension or revocation of license approvals;

•voluntary or mandatory product recalls and related publicity requirements;

•total or partial suspension of production;

•product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of our product candidates; and

•injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising, and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. However, companies may share truthful and not misleading information that is not inconsistent with the labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability. 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. 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.

Ongoing healthcare legislative and regulatory reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our business and results of operations.

In the United States and other jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes to the healthcare system that could affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval or licensure. Changes in regulations, statutes or the interpretation of existing regulations governing the regulatory approval or licensure, manufacture, and marketing of regulated products or the pricing, coverage and reimbursement thereof could impact our business in the future by resulting in, for example: (i) changes to our manufacturing arrangements; (ii) additions or modifications to product labeling; (iii) the recall or discontinuation of our products; (iv) more rigorous coverage criteria or additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval; or (v) additional record-keeping requirements. If any such changes were to be imposed, they could adversely affect the operation of our business.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs, as detailed in Part I, Item 1 – Business – Government Regulation – Current and Future Healthcare Reform Legislation of this Report. For example, in August 2022, President Biden signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act, or IRA, which implements substantial changes to the Medicare program, including drug pricing reforms and changes to the Medicare Part D benefit design.

Among other reforms, the IRA imposes inflation rebates on drug manufacturers for products reimbursed under Medicare Parts B and D if the prices of those products increase faster than inflation; implements changes to the Medicare Part D benefit that, beginning in 2025, will cap patient annual out-of-pocket spending at $2,000, while imposing new discount obligations for pharmaceutical manufacturers and payors; and, beginning in 2026, establishes a “maximum fair price” for a fixed number of high spend pharmaceutical and biological products that are selected by CMS and covered under Medicare Parts B and D following a price negotiation process with the agency. For a drug product to be considered a qualifying single source drug that may be selected by CMS for price negotiation under the “maximum fair price” program, at least seven years must have elapsed since the biological product was licensed by the FDA. For a biological product to be considered a qualifying single source drug that may be selected by CMS for price negotiation, at least eleven years must have elapsed since the biological product was licensed by the FDA.

The IRA explicitly excludes from price negotiation orphan drugs designated for only one rare disease or condition and for which the only active approved indication is for such disease or condition. Those drugs with multiple orphan designations are not excluded from drug price negotiation. As we are developing bexotegrast in multiple orphan indications and may seek obtain orphan drug designation for other product candidates, this aspect of the IRA could have a negative impact on our ability to rely on the orphan drug exclusion to the "maximum fair price".

Since its enactment, CMS, has taken steps to implement various drug pricing provisions of the IRA. This includes, without limitation, releasing the negotiated maximum prices, which will be effective in 2026, for the first ten drugs that were subject to the IRA’s negotiation process, releasing quarterly lists of Medicare Part B products that are subject to adjusted coinsurance rates based on the inflationary rebate provisions of the IRA, and announcing a list of 15 additional drugs that will be subject to price negotiations during 2025. While it remains to be seen how the drug pricing provisions imposed by the IRA will affect the broader pharmaceutical industry (including orphan drug or small molecule development), several pharmaceutical manufacturers and other industry stakeholders have challenged the law, including through lawsuits brought against the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), the Secretary of HHS, CMS, and the CMS Administrator challenging the constitutionality and administrative implementation of the IRA’s drug price negotiation provisions. We cannot predict whether the IRA, or any of its component parts, will be overturned, repealed, replaced, or amended nor can we predict the likelihood, nature, or extent of other health reform initiatives that may arise from future legislation, administrative, or other action. However, we expect these initiatives to increase pressure on drug pricing. Further, certain broader legislation that is not targeted to the healthcare industry may nonetheless adversely affect

our profitability. Moreover, the healthcare regulatory landscape can also be affected by election cycles and any resulting changes in healthcare policy priorities. If we or any third parties we may engage are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or such third parties are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidates may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Inadequate funding for the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies 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 to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, 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 may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, 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 employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, 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. Further, in our operations as a public company, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

Drug marketing and reimbursement regulations may materially affect our ability to market and secure reimbursement for our products.

We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in both the United States and in selected foreign jurisdictions. If we obtain approval in one or more foreign jurisdictions for our product candidates, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those jurisdictions. In some foreign countries, particularly those in the EU, the pricing of drugs is subject to governmental control and other market regulations which could put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. As of January 2025, Regulation No 2021/2282 on Health Technology Assessment (HTA Regulation) is applicable in the EU. The HTA Regulation intends to foster cooperation among EU member states in assessing health technologies and provide the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after obtaining marketing approval of a product candidate. Furthermore, in many European countries (including the U.K.), effective access to the market depends on whether the product obtains a positive recommendation from the relevant health technology assessment body. In addition, market acceptance and sales of our product candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors for our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future health care reform measures.

Much like the federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibition in the United States, the provision of benefits or advantages to induce or reward improper performance generally to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is also prohibited in the EU. The provision of benefits or advantages to induce or reward improper performance generally is governed by the national anti-bribery laws of EU Member States, and in respect of the U.K. (which is no longer a member of the EU), the Bribery Act 2010. Infringement of these laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment. EU Directive 2001/83/EC, which is the EU Directive governing medicinal products for human use, further provides that, where medicinal products are being promoted to persons qualified to prescribe, recommend, use, procure or supply them, no gifts, pecuniary advantages or benefits in kind may be supplied, offered or promised to such persons unless they are inexpensive and relevant to the practice of medicine or pharmacy. This provision has been transposed into the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 and so remains applicable in the U.K. despite its departure from the EU.

Payments made to physicians in certain EU Member States and more generally throughout Europe (including the U.K.) and other countries must be publicly disclosed under applicable transparency provisions. Moreover, agreements with physicians often must be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his or her competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the EU Member States. Failure

to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment.

In addition, in most foreign countries, including those within the EEA, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing and reimbursement are the prerogative of the Member States and vary widely from country to country. For example, the EU provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced member states, can further reduce prices. A member state may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. In some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical study or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of any of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for biopharmaceutical products will allow or maintain favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the EU do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or if reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, our revenues from sales and the potential profitability of any of our product candidates in those countries would be negatively affected.

Additional laws and regulations governing international operations could negatively impact or restrict our operations.

If we expand our operations outside of the United States, we must dedicate additional resources to comply with numerous laws and regulations in each jurisdiction in which we plan to operate. The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, prohibits any U.S. individual or business entity from paying, offering, authorizing payment, or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with certain accounting provisions requiring the company to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations.

Compliance with the FCPA is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the FCPA presents particular challenges in the biopharmaceutical industry, because, in many countries, hospitals are operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees are considered foreign officials. Certain payments to hospitals and healthcare providers in connection with clinical trials and other work have been deemed to be improper payments to government officials and have led to FCPA enforcement actions.

Various laws, regulations and executive orders also restrict the use and dissemination outside of the United States, or the sharing with certain non-U.S. nationals, of information products classified for national security purposes, as well as certain products, technology and technical data relating to those products. If we expand our presence outside of the United States, it will require us to dedicate additional resources to comply with these laws, and these laws may preclude us from developing, manufacturing, or selling certain products and product candidates outside of the United States, which could limit our growth potential and increase our development costs.

The failure to comply with laws governing international business practices may result in substantial civil and criminal penalties and suspension or debarment from government contracting. The SEC, also may suspend or bar issuers from trading securities on U.S. exchanges for violations of the FCPA’s accounting provisions.

We are subject to certain U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations. We can face serious consequences for violations.

Among other matters, U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions, and other trade laws and regulations, which are collectively referred to as Trade Laws, prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contract research organizations, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors, and other partners from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting, or receiving directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. Violations of Trade Laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm, and other consequences. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other

organizations. We also expect our non-U.S. activities to increase in time. We plan to engage third parties for clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other regulatory approvals and we can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents, or partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

Our success depends in part on our ability to protect our intellectual property. It is difficult and costly to protect our proprietary rights and technology, and we may not be able to ensure their protection.

Our business will depend in large part on obtaining and maintaining patent, IP regulatory rights (such as data exclusivity, marketing exclusivity and patent extensions) trademark and trade secret protection of our proprietary technologies and our product candidates, their respective components, synthetic intermediates, formulations, combination therapies, methods used to manufacture them and methods of treatment, as well as successfully defending these patents against third-party challenges. Our ability to stop unauthorized third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our product candidates is dependent upon the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents that cover these activities and whether a court would issue an injunctive remedy. If we are unable to secure and maintain patent protection for any product or technology we develop, or if the scope of the patent protection secured is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to ours, and our ability to commercialize any product candidates we may develop may be adversely affected.

The patenting process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. In addition, we may not pursue, obtain, or maintain patent protection in all relevant markets. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. Moreover, in some circumstances, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing and prosecution of patent applications, or to maintain the patents, covering technology that we license from or license to third parties and are reliant on our licensors or licensees.

The strength of patents in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical field involves complex legal and scientific questions and can be uncertain. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates or uses thereof in the United States or in other foreign countries. Even if the patents do successfully issue, third parties may challenge the validity, enforceability, or scope thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our technology, including our product candidates, or prevent others from designing around our claims. If the breadth or strength of protection provided by the patent applications, we hold with respect to our product candidates is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop, and threaten our ability to commercialize, our product candidates. Further, if we encounter delays in our clinical trials, the period of time during which we could market our product candidates under patent protection would be reduced.

We cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to our technology, including our product candidates, and, if we were not, we may be precluded from obtaining patent protection for our technology, including our product candidates.

We cannot be certain that we were the first to invent the inventions covered by pending patent applications and, if we are not, we may be subject to priority disputes. Furthermore, for United States applications in which all claims are entitled to a priority date before March 16, 2013, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third-party or instituted by the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. Similarly, for United States applications in which at least one claim is not entitled to a priority date before March 16, 2013, derivation proceedings can be instituted to determine whether the subject matter of a patent claim was derived from a prior inventor’s disclosure.

We may be required to disclaim part or all of the term of certain patents or all of the term of certain patent applications. There may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the validity or enforceability of a patent or patent application claim. There also may be prior art of which we are aware, but which we do not believe affects the validity or enforceability of a claim, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to affect the validity or enforceability of a claim. No assurance can be given that if challenged, our patents would be declared by a court to be valid or enforceable or that even if found valid and enforceable, would adequately protect our product candidates, or would be found by a court to be infringed by a competitor’s technology or product. We may analyze patents or patent applications of our competitors that we believe are relevant to our activities and consider that we are free to operate in relation to our product candidates, but our competitors may obtain issued claims, including in patents we consider to be unrelated, which block our efforts or may potentially result in our product candidates or our activities infringing such claims. The possibility exists that others will develop products which have the same effect as our products on an independent basis which do not infringe our

patents or other intellectual property rights or will design around the claims of patents that may issue that cover our products.

Recent or future patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents. Under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or America Invents Act, enacted in 2013, the United States moved from a “first to invent” to a “first-to-file” system. Under a “first-to-file” system, assuming the other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application generally will be entitled to a patent on the invention regardless of whether another inventor had made the invention earlier. The America Invents Act includes a number of other significant changes to U.S. patent law, including provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and establish a new post-grant review system. The America Invents Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business and financial condition.

The degree of future protection for our proprietary rights is uncertain because legal means afford only limited protection and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep our competitive advantage. For example:

•others may be able to make or use compounds that are similar to the compositions of our product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of our patents or those of our licensors;

•we or our licensors, as the case may be, may fail to meet our obligations to the U.S. government in regards to any in-licensed patents and patent applications funded by U.S. government grants, leading to the loss of patent rights;

•we or our licensors, as the case may be, might not have been the first to file patent applications for these inventions;

•others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies;

•it is possible that our pending patent applications will not result in issued patents;

•we may not be able to extend the patent term in some jurisdictions;

•it is possible that there are prior public disclosures that could invalidate our or our licensors’ patents, as the case may be, or parts of our or their patents;

•it is possible that others may circumvent our owned or in-licensed patents or regulatory intellectual property rights such as our data protection, orphan market exclusivity and others;

•it is possible that there are unpublished applications or patent applications maintained in secrecy that may later issue with claims covering our products or technology similar to ours;

•the laws of foreign countries may not protect our or our licensors’, as the case may be, proprietary rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States;

•the claims of our owned or in-licensed issued patents or patent applications, if and when issued, may not cover our product candidates;

•our owned or in-licensed issued patents may not provide us with any competitive advantages, may be narrowed in scope, or be held invalid or unenforceable as a result of legal challenges by third parties;

•the inventors of our owned or in-licensed patents or patent applications may become involved with competitors, develop products or processes which design around our patents, or become hostile to us or the patents or patent applications on which they are named as inventors;

•it is possible that our owned or in-licensed patents or patent applications omit individual(s) that should be listed as inventor(s) or include individual(s) that should not be listed as inventor(s), which may cause these patents or patents issuing from these patent applications to be held invalid or unenforceable;

•we have engaged in scientific collaborations in the past and will continue to do so in the future. Such collaborators may develop adjacent or competing products to ours that are outside the scope of our patents;

•we may not develop additional proprietary technologies for which we can obtain patent protection;

•it is possible that product candidates or diagnostic tests we develop may be covered by third parties’ patents or other exclusive rights; or

•the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business.

We may enter into license or other collaboration agreements that may impose certain obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under such agreements with third parties, we could lose license rights that may be important to our future business.

In connection with our efforts to expand our pipeline of product candidates, we may enter into certain licenses or other collaboration agreements pertaining to the in-license of rights to additional candidates. Such agreements may impose various diligence, milestone payment, royalty, insurance, or other obligations on us, subject to antitrust law restrictions. If we fail to comply with these obligations, our licensor or collaboration partners may have the right to terminate the relevant agreement, in which event we would not be able to develop or market the products covered by such licensed intellectual property.

Moreover, disputes may arise regarding intellectual property subject to a licensing agreement, including:

•the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues;

•the extent to which our product candidates, technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement;

•the sublicensing of patent and other rights under our collaborative development relationships;

•our diligence obligations under the license agreement and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations;

•the inventorship and ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners; and

•the priority of invention of patented technology.

In addition, the agreements under which we currently license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects.

In addition, we may have limited control over the maintenance and prosecution of these in-licensed patents and patent applications, or any other intellectual property that may be related to our in-licensed intellectual property. For example, we cannot be certain that such activities by any future licensors have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights. We have limited control over the manner in which our licensors initiate an infringement proceeding against a third-party infringer of the intellectual property rights or defend certain of the intellectual property that is licensed to us. It is possible that the licensors’ infringement proceeding, or defense activities may be less vigorous than had we conducted them ourselves.

If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed.

In addition to patent protection, we rely heavily upon know-how and trade secret protection, as well as non-disclosure agreements and invention assignment agreements with our employees, consultants and third parties, to protect our confidential and proprietary information, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. In addition to contractual measures, we try to protect the confidential nature of our proprietary information using physical and technological security measures. Such measures may not, for example, in the case of misappropriation of a trade secret by an employee or third-party with authorized access, provide adequate protection for our proprietary information. Our security measures may not prevent an employee or consultant from misappropriating our trade secrets and providing them to a competitor, and recourse we take against such misconduct may not provide an adequate remedy to protect our interests fully. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret can be difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, trade secrets may be independently developed by others in a manner that could prevent legal recourse by us. For example, our clinical development strategy includes the testing of live tissue samples, and our techniques for preserving and testing these samples are proprietary and confidential. If one or more third parties obtain or are otherwise able to replicate these techniques, an important feature and differentiator of our clinical development strategy will become available to potential competitors. If any of our confidential or proprietary

information, such as our trade secrets, were to be disclosed or misappropriated, or if any such information was independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position could be harmed.

In addition, courts outside the United States are sometimes less willing to protect trade secrets. If we choose to go to court to stop a third party from using any of our trade secrets, we may incur substantial costs. These lawsuits may consume our time and other resources even if we are successful. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology.

Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information concerning our business or financial affairs developed by or made known to the individual or entity during the course of the party’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. In the case of employees, the agreements provide that all inventions conceived by the individual, and which are related to our current or planned business or research and development or made during normal working hours, on our premises or using our equipment or proprietary information, are our exclusive property. In addition, we take other appropriate precautions, such as physical and technological security measures, to guard against misappropriation of our proprietary technology by third parties. We have also adopted policies and conduct training that provides guidance on our expectations, and our advice for best practices, in protecting our trade secrets.

Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our product discovery and development efforts.

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including interference, derivation, inter partes review, post grant review, and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. We may be exposed to, or threatened with, future litigation by third parties having patent or other intellectual property rights alleging that our product candidates and/or proprietary technologies infringe their intellectual property rights. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. As the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. Moreover, it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of drugs, products or their methods of use or manufacture. Thus, because of the large number of patents issued and patent applications filed in our fields, there may be a risk that third parties may allege they have patent rights encompassing our product candidates, technologies, or methods.

If a third party claims that we infringe its intellectual property rights, we may face a number of issues, including, but not limited to:

•infringement and other intellectual property claims which, regardless of merit, may be expensive and time-consuming to litigate and may divert our management’s attention from our core business;

•substantial damages for infringement, which we may have to pay if a court decides that the product candidate or technology at issue infringes on or violates the third party’s rights, and, if the court finds that the infringement was willful, we could be ordered to pay treble damages and the patent owner’s attorneys’ fees;

•a court prohibiting us from developing, manufacturing, marketing or selling our product candidates, or from using our proprietary technologies, unless the third party licenses its product rights to us, which it is not required to do;

•if a license is available from a third party, we may have to pay substantial royalties, upfront fees and other amounts, and/or grant cross-licenses to intellectual property rights for our products and any license that is available may be non-exclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property; and

•redesigning our product candidates or processes so they do not infringe, which may not be possible or may require substantial monetary expenditures and time.

Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or administrative proceedings, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure.

Our collaborators may assert ownership or commercial rights to inventions they develop from research we support or that we develop from our use of the tissue samples or other biological materials, which they provide to us, or otherwise arising from the collaboration.

We collaborate with several institutions, universities, medical centers, physicians, and researchers in scientific matters and expect to continue to enter into additional collaboration agreements. In certain cases, we do not have written agreements with these collaborators, or the written agreements we have do not cover intellectual property rights. Also, we rely on numerous third parties to provide us with tissue samples and biological materials that we use to conduct our research activities and develop our product candidates. If we cannot successfully negotiate sufficient ownership and commercial rights to any inventions that result from our use of a third-party collaborator’s materials, or if disputes arise with respect to the intellectual property developed with the use of a collaborator’s samples, or data developed in a collaborator’s study, we may be limited in our ability to capitalize on the market potential of these inventions or developments.

Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization.

There may be third-party patents of which we are currently unaware with claims to compositions of matter, materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment that encompass the composition, use or manufacture of our product candidates. There may be currently pending patent applications of which we are currently unaware which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates or their use or manufacture may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover our product candidates, intermediates used in the manufacture of our product candidates or our materials generally, aspects of our formulations or methods of use, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, our ability to commercialize our product candidates may be impaired or delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. Even if we obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future product candidates.

Parties making claims against us may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties, or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly.

Third parties may assert that our employees or consultants have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information or misappropriated trade secrets.

As is common in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries, we employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or biopharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although no claims against us are currently pending, and although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of a former employer or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying

monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments, and, if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. This type of litigation or proceeding could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce our resources available for development activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other intellectual property related proceedings could adversely affect our ability to compete in the marketplace.

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to develop any future product candidates on acceptable terms.

Because our programs may involve additional product candidates that may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights.

Our product candidates may also require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently, and these rights may be held by others. We may develop products containing our compounds and pre-existing biopharmaceutical compounds. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary or important to our business operations. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all, which would harm our business. We may need to cease use of the compositions or methods covered by such third-party intellectual property rights and may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if we were able to develop such alternatives, which may not be feasible. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology.

Additionally, we sometimes collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. In certain cases, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to others, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property or to maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of such program and our business and financial condition could suffer.

The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and companies, which may be more established, or have greater resources than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our product candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete such negotiations and ultimately acquire the rights to the intellectual property surrounding the additional product candidates that we may seek to acquire.

We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or the patents of our licensors, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our current or future licensors. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in an infringement proceeding, a court may decide that one or more of our patents is not valid or is unenforceable or may refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology in question or for other reasons. An adverse result in any litigation or defense proceedings could put one or more of our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly and could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business.

We may choose to challenge the patentability of claims in a third party’s U.S. patent by requesting that the USPTO review the patent claims in an ex-parte re-examination, inter partes review or post-grant review proceedings. These

proceedings are expensive and may consume our time or other resources. We may choose to challenge a third party’s patent in patent opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office, or EPO, or other foreign patent office.

The costs of these opposition proceedings could be substantial and may consume our time or other resources. If we fail to obtain a favorable result at the USPTO, EPO or other patent office then we may be exposed to litigation by a third party alleging that the patent may be infringed by our product candidates or proprietary technologies.

In addition, because some patent applications in the United States may be maintained in secrecy until the patents are issued, patent applications in the United States and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, and publications in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that others have not filed patent applications for technology covered by our owned and in-licensed issued patents or our pending applications, or that we or, if applicable, a licensor were the first to invent the technology. Our competitors may have filed, and may in the future file, patent applications covering our products or technology similar to ours. Any such patent application may have priority over our owned and in-licensed patent applications or patents, which could require us to obtain rights to issued patents covering such technologies. If another party has filed a U.S. patent application on inventions similar to those owned by or in-licensed to us, we or, in the case of in-licensed technology, the licensor may have to participate in an interference or derivation proceeding declared by the USPTO to determine priority of invention in the United States. If we or one of our licensors is a party to an interference or derivation proceeding involving a U.S. patent application on inventions owned by or in-licensed to us, we may incur substantial costs, divert management’s time and expend other resources, even if we are successful.

Interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could result in a loss of our current patent rights and could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or if a non-exclusive license is offered and our competitors gain access to the same technology. Litigation or interference proceedings may result in a decision adverse to our interests and, even if we are successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. We may not be able to prevent, alone or with our licensors, misappropriation of our trade secrets or confidential information, particularly in countries where the laws may not protect those rights as fully as in the United States.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock.

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

Periodic maintenance fees on any issued patent are due to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patent. The USPTO and various foreign governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent application process and following the issuance of a patent. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In certain circumstances, even inadvertent noncompliance events may permanently and irrevocably jeopardize patent rights. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Any patents covering our product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or the USPTO (or foreign patent offices).

If we or one of our licensors initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate, as applicable, is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace, and there are numerous grounds upon which a third party can assert invalidity or unenforceability of a patent. Third parties may also raise similar claims before administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, inter partes review, post grant

review, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our product candidates. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we, our patent counsel and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, or if we are otherwise unable to adequately protect our rights, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business and our ability to commercialize or license our technology and product candidates.

Our earliest patents may expire before, or soon after, our first product achieves marketing approval in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Upon the expiration of our current patents, we may lose the right to exclude others from practicing these inventions. The expiration of these patents could also have a similar material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. We own pending patent applications covering our proprietary technologies or our product candidates that if issued as patents are expected to expire from 2037 through 2045, without taking into account any possible patent term adjustments or extensions. However, we cannot be assured that the USPTO, EPO or other relevant foreign patent offices will grant any of these patent applications.

Changes in patent law in the U.S. and in foreign jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products.

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 16, 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. On March 16, 2013, under the America Invents Act, enacted in September 2011, the United States transitioned to a first inventor to file system. A third party that files a patent application in the USPTO on or after March 16, 2013, but before us could therefore be awarded a patent covering an invention of ours even if we had made the invention before it was made by such third party. This will require us to be cognizant of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing or until issuance, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to either (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our or our licensor’s patents or patent applications.

PLRX US Equity

PLRX · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

PLRX US Equity☆

PLRX · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

Item 1A. Risk Factors.

PLRX US Equity