10-K

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, DC 20549

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

FORM 10-K

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

(Mark One)

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024

Commission File Number: 001-35890

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Tempest Therapeutics, Inc.

(Exact Name of Registrant as Specified in its Charter)

___________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

2000 Sierra Point Parkway, Suite 400Brisbane, California 94005

(Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code)

Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: (415)798-8589

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

Title of Each Class Trading Symbol(s) Name of Each Exchange on which Registered

Common Stock, $0.001 par value TPST The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC

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

_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. Yes ̈No ☒

Indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. Yes ☐ No ☒

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ No ̈

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§ 232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒

No ̈

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act.

Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☐

Non-accelerated filer ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒

Emerging growth company ☐

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

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

If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ̈

Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to § 240.10D-1(b). ̈

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Act). Yes ̈ No ☒

The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity of the registrant held by non-affiliates as of June 28, 2024 (the last business day of the registrant’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter), based on a closing price of $2.19 per share of the registrant’s common stock as reported on The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC on June 28, 2024, was approximately $53.6 million. For purposes of this computation, all officers, directors, and stockholders that the registrant has concluded are affiliates of the registrant are deemed to be affiliates. This calculation does not reflect a determination that certain holders are affiliates of the Registrant for any other purpose.

As of March 21, 2025, the registrant had 45,483,384 shares of common stock, $0.001 par value per share, outstanding.

DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE

Portions of the registrant’s definitive Proxy Statement for its 2025 Annual Meeting of Stockholders to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission pursuant to Regulation 14A not later than 120 days after the end of the fiscal year covered by this Annual Report on Form 10-K are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS 1

PART I 3

Item 1. Business 3

Item 1A. Risk Factors 28

Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 78

Item 1C. Cybersecurity 78

Item 2. Properties 79

Item 3. Legal Proceedings 79

Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 80

Item 6. [Reserved] 81

Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 92

Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 93

Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 114

Item 9B. Other Information 114

Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections 115

Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 116

Item 11. Executive Compensation 116

Item 14. Principal Accountant Fees and Services 117

Item 15. Exhibit and Financial Statement Schedules 118

Signatures

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this “Annual Report”), contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, (the “Exchange Act”), that involve substantial risks and uncertainties. The forward-looking statements are contained principally in Part I, Item 1. “Business,” Part I, Item 1A. “Risk Factors,” and Part II, Item 7. “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” but are also contained elsewhere in this Annual Report. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by the words “may,” “might,” “will,” “could,” “would,” “should,” “expect,” “intend,” “plan,” “objective,” “anticipate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “project,” “potential,” “continue” and “ongoing,” or the negative of these terms, or other comparable terminology intended to identify statements about the future. These statements involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties and other factors that may cause our actual results, performance or achievements to be materially different from the information expressed or implied by these forward-looking statements. Although we believe that we have a reasonable basis for each forward-looking statement contained in this Annual Report, we caution you that these statements are based on a combination of facts and factors currently known by us and our expectations of the future, about which we cannot be certain. Forward-looking statements include statements about:

•

our expected future growth and our ability to manage such growth;

•

our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize TPST-1495 and amezalpat and any future product candidates;

•

our estimates regarding expenses, future revenue, capital requirements and needs for additional financing;

•

the size and growth potential of the markets for our product candidates, and our ability to serve those markets;

•

the development, regulatory approval, efficacy and commercialization of competing products;

•

our ability to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates;

•

our ability to retain regulatory approval for our product candidates or future product candidates in the United States and in any foreign countries in which we make seek to do business;

•

our ability to retain and hire our board of directors, senior management, or operational personnel;

•

our ability to develop and maintain our corporate infrastructure, including our ability to design and maintain an effective system of internal controls;

•

our ability to remain in compliance with our obligations under our term loan with Oxford Finance LLC, or to obtain a waiver from Oxford for any failure to comply with the covenants contained in such term loan agreement;

•

general economic, political, and market conditions and overall fluctuations in the financial markets in the United States and abroad, including as a result of bank failures, public health crises or geopolitical tensions;

•

our expectation regarding the period during which we will qualify as a smaller reporting company under the federal securities laws; and

•

our expectations regarding our ability to obtain, maintain and enforce intellectual property protection for our products and technology, as well as our ability to operate our business without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of others.

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

As used herein, the words “Tempest,” “we,” “us,” “our,” and "company" refer to Tempest Therapeutics, Inc. and its direct and indirect subsidiaries, as applicable.

PART I

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company moving towards late-stage development with a diverse portfolio of targeted and immune-mediated product candidates with the potential to be first-in-class to treat a wide range of cancers. Our novel programs range from early research to the lead program, amezalpat (previously known as TPST-1120), that is poised to begin a pivotal study in first-line hepatocellular carcinoma (“HCC”). In addition to amezalpat, our second clinical-stage therapeutic product candidate is TPST-1495, which we expect will enter Phase 2 development in 2025. We believe both amezalpat and TPST-1495 are the first clinical-stage molecules designed to inhibit their respective targets.

Our philosophy is to build a company based upon not only good ideas and creative science, but also upon the efficient translation of those ideas into therapies that will improve patients’ lives. Each of our programs are designed to provide different and independent approaches to fighting cancer, providing a portfolio of truly diversified assets.

Amezalpat (TPST-1120)

Amezalpat is an oral, small molecule, selective antagonist of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (“PPARα”) being developed for the treatment of first-line unresectable or metastatic HCC.

In June 2024, we unveiled positive survival data from the ongoing global randomized Phase 1b/2 clinical study demonstrating that amezalpat delivered a six-month improvement in median overall survival (“OS”) with a hazard ratio (“HR”) of 0.65 when combined with atezolizumab and bevacizumab in comparison to atezolizumab and bevacizumab alone, the standard of care, in the first-line treatment of patients with unresectable or metastatic HCC. Additionally, the survival benefit was preserved across key subpopulations, including patients with PD-L1 negative disease and β-catenin mutated disease, consistent with amezalpat’s proposed mechanism of action targeting both tumor cells directly and the patient’s immune system.

In August 2024, we announced the successful completion of our end-of-Phase 2 meeting with the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) regarding the development of amezalpat for the treatment of first-line unresectable or metastatic HCC. The FDA provided positive feedback on the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial design, which closely mirrors the positive randomized Phase 2 study. The planned Phase 3 trial is designed to use the current Phase 2 amezalpat dose and schedule in combination with atezolizumab and bevacizumab and will be compared to atezolizumab and bevacizumab alone, the standard of care. The primary endpoint of the trial will be OS. Additionally, the FDA agreed to a pre-specified early efficacy analysis, which, if met, would potentially reduce the time to primary read-out by up to eight months.

In November 2024, we received a “Study May Proceed” letter from the FDA, authorizing the initiation of our pivotal Phase 3 trial. In January 2025, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation (“ODD”) for amezalpat for the treatment of patients with HCC. In February 2025, the FDA granted Fast Track Designation (“FTD”), underscoring the agency’s recognition of the urgent need for new treatment options for HCC. These designations provide potential regulatory benefits, including increased engagement with the FDA, eligibility for accelerated approval and priority review, and, for ODD, potential market exclusivity upon approval. We continue to advance amezalpat’s clinical development in alignment with both the FDA and the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) and are actively preparing for the initiation of our pivotal Phase 3 study.

TPST-1495

Our second clinical program, TPST-1495, is a novel, small-molecule dual antagonist of the EP2 and EP4 receptors of prostaglandin E2 (“PGE2”), a pathway implicated in multiple cancers. Our development strategy for TPST-1495 includes evaluation in Familial Adenomatous Polyposis (“FAP”), a rare genetic disorder that significantly increases the risk of gastrointestinal cancers and for which there are no approved systemic therapies. Given that prostaglandin signaling is also

implicated in FAP and based on positive preclinical data in a relevant mouse model, we believe there is strong mechanistic support for this approach.

In March 2025, the Cancer Prevention Clinical Trials Network (“CP-CTNet”) received a “Study May Proceed” letter from the FDA, authorizing the initiation of a National Cancer Institute (“NCI”)-funded Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating TPST-1495 in patients with FAP. This trial, run by CP-CTNet and financially supported by the NCI’s Division of Cancer Prevention, underscores the urgent need for innovative cancer prevention strategies in high-risk patient populations. The Phase 2 study is expected to begin in 2025.

Beyond these clinical programs, we plan to continue to leverage our drug development and company-building experience along with academic relationships to identify promising new targets that have the potential to feed new programs into our pipeline. Our Discovery Research team employs a multidisciplinary approach to identify and validate therapeutic targets in oncology, and preclinical validation studies are then conducted to further understand the mechanism of action and potential therapeutic benefit to patients.

Our Pipeline

Our product development pipeline consists of the following orally available therapies, which if approved by the FDA, we believe will be first in class:

1. Timing is an estimate based on current projections and status of programs. For amezalpat, Phase 3 timelines are subject to funding.

2. A per-protocol planned analysis at 70% of events, prior to full data analysis.

3. Dependent on additional funding.

4. To be operationalized by the Cancer Prevention Network of NCI.

Strategy

Our team has come together to build an integrated company to deliver meaningful therapies to cancer patients by leveraging our collective capabilities and experience. We expect to build value for our stockholders with the following over-arching strategy:

•

Advance amezalpat into a pivotal Phase 3 study in first-line HCC patients where amezalpat will be studied in a combination treatment and compared to a standard-of-care therapy. We believe the continued positive results from the ongoing randomized Phase 1b/2 study provides strategic opportunities for us, and we received positive feedback from

the FDA on the pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial design. We are also evaluating further development in RCC and CCA based on the Phase 1 data presented at ASCO 2022.

•

Explore TPST-1495 in a Phase 2 study in patients with FAP with CP-CTNet in 2025.

•

Enhance our pipeline by identifying novel oncology targets and in-licensing opportunities. Although we believe we have a robust pipeline, we continue to evaluate and pursue novel targets and product candidates for acquisition and in-licensing to supplement our internal research efforts and further build our pipeline of targeted molecules for oncology. Through our team’s focus and expertise in oncology and immunology, as well as established relationships with oncology and immunology thought leaders, we believe we are positioning the company as a partner of choice for innovative oncology drug candidate development. Continued advances in the biological understanding of diseases should provide opportunities to further expand our portfolio with preclinical and/or clinical product candidates.

•

Explore business development opportunities to maximize the potential of our pipeline and extend financial resources. We believe that our pipeline has broad potential reach and partnerships that bring in additional expertise and/or geographic presence could be important to increase the likelihood of success. We currently own all rights to our programs. We intend to become a fully integrated biopharmaceutical company and build a targeted sales force in the United States to support the commercialization of our drug candidates, if approved.

Clinical Programs

Amezalpat: PPARαTranscription Factor Antagonist

Amezalpat, a potentially first-in-class oral small molecule antagonist of PPARα, has completed a Phase 1a/b trial, and is currently being studied in an ongoing randomized Phase 1b/2 trial. The Phase 1a/b trial was a multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation, that evaluated amezalpat as both a monotherapy and combination therapy with nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors. Results from both the monotherapy and combination arms were presented in an oral presentation at the ASCO conference in 2022. The ongoing Phase 1b/2 trial is a randomized, multicenter, global study in collaboration with Roche that is evaluating amezalpat in combination with atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ®) and bevacizumab (Avastin®) in previously untreated patients with advanced HCC, compared to atezolizumab and bevacizumab alone, which is a standard of care for that indication and patient population. As of an updated February 14, 2024 data cutoff date, the ongoing global randomized Phase 1b/2 trial continued to show positive outcomes in patients with advanced or metastatic HCC who received the amezalpat combination therapy as compared to the control arm, including a survival benefit in both the overall population and key subpopulations.

Tumors evolve to promote their own survival by alternating energy sources, promoting angiogenesis and evading immune recognition. PPARα is a transcription factor that is activated through binding of long-chain fatty acid ligands, which in turn regulates the expression of genes that control glucose and lipid homeostasis, inflammation, proliferation, differentiation and cell death. Included among these regulated genes are those that enable fatty acid oxidation (“FAO”), and β-oxidation metabolic pathways in cellular peroxisomes and in mitochondria. An FAO metabolic profile is associated with tumor proliferation, induction of angiogenesis and immune suppression. Published studies and internal Tempest analyses of over 9,000 primary or metastatic tumor samples in the Human Cancer Genome public database reveal a metabolic gene expression profile characterized by increased PPARα, FAO genes and lipogenesis associated with increased metastatic potential and reduced survival enrichment among multiple cancers, including HCC, CCA, breast carcinoma, colorectal adenocarcinoma, RCC, lung adenocarcinoma and prostate adenocarcinoma. Amezalpat is designed to block the pathways that support tumor cell proliferation, angiogenesis and immune suppression, resulting in reduced disease and patient benefit.

Summary of Amezalpat Preclinical Results

We have conducted pre-clinical pharmacology studies along with pharmacokinetics (“PK”), and toxicology studies with amezalpat to support its ongoing evaluation for the treatment of patients with advanced solid tumors. The combined results of the preclinical studies that we have performed indicate that amezalpat has a dual anti-tumor mechanism of action that involves both directly inhibiting tumor proliferation and targeting suppressive immune response pathways to promote effective tumor-specific immunity. Our preclinical results support the large body of published literature that the PPARα target genes play an integral role in tumor growth, angiogenesis and evasion of immune recognition, and provide the scientific rationale for targeting this pathway with amezalpat.

Immune checkpoint blockade enhances anti-tumor immunity by restoring the activity of cytotoxic T (Teff) cells. Emerging experimental results suggest that inhibiting FAO with a PPARα antagonist may target resistance mechanisms to both anti-PD-L1/PD-1 and anti-VEGF therapies, supporting the combination of amezalpat with either or both therapies. We have conducted preclinical studies showing that while both amezalpat or anti-PD-1 monotherapy inhibited outgrowth of established flank MC38 tumors, the combination of these two agents resulted in synergistic anti-tumor activity. In addition, MC38 tumor-bearing mice cured by the combination therapy, unlike age-matched naïve control mice, were completely resistant to tumor growth when rechallenged with autologous MC38 tumor cells, demonstrating that amezalpat in combination with anti-PD-1 induced lasting tumor-specific immune memory. In addition, activating mutations in the Wnt/B-catenin pathway represent the most frequently dysregulated pathway in HCC. Such mutations render a tumor cell dependent upon FAO for its energy source, and in preclinical studies, Tempest has shown reduction and long-term durable cures in mice bearing Wnt/B-catenin activated HCC tumors treated with amezalpat and an immune checkpoint inhibitor. The promise of these pre-clinical results have been observed in the clinic, where we observed increased clinical benefit in our Phase 1b/2 study in HCC patients who had a mutation in this pathway.

Efficacy in Syngeneic β-Catenin-driven Hepatocellular Carcinoma Model

Tumor resistance to anti-angiogenic drugs is also associated with elevated lipogenesis and FAO, primarily through the vascular regression and hypoxic environment that this class of therapies engenders. In response, tumor cells can switch to FAO as a mechanism of resistance against anti-angiogenic therapy. In a preclinical study, we confirmed that combination of amezalpat with tyrosine kinase inhibitor-(“TKI-”), based anti-angiogenesis therapy confers potent anti-tumor activity.

The preclinical data for amezalpat are consistent with the data observed from our Phase 1 trial presented at ASCO in 2022. Taken together, we believe the hypothesis behind the amezalpat program, the preclinical data, and the Phase 1 data support the design of, and data observed from, the ongoing study of amezalpat in first-line HCC in combination with standard of care as well as the potential evaluation of amezalpat in combination with other therapeutic agents, such as a tyrosine kinase inhibitor (“TKI”), in FAO-reliant malignancies such as HCC and RCC.

Overview of amezalpat Clinical Trials

We completed a Phase 1a/b study of amezalpat and a randomized Phase 1b/2 clinical study is ongoing. We have released positive data from both studies, and we believe the continued positive data announced in 2024 supports the advancement of amezalpat to a pivotal Phase 3 trial in first-line HCC. The Phase 1a/b trial evaluated both monotherapy and combination therapy with the anti-PD-1 agent nivolumab in patients with advanced solid tumors that our PPARα-dependent transcriptome analysis of diverse human cancers revealed favor the usage of FAO. Results from both the monotherapy and the combination arms were presented in an oral presentation at the ASCO conference in 2022.

Amezalpat demonstrated monotherapy clinical benefit in patients with late-line, treatment-refractory cancers where objective responses (RECIST v1.1) would not be expected, including pancreatic, CCA, and colorectal cancers (“CRC”). Results showed that 53% (10/19) of patients experienced clinical benefit in the form of disease control, including tumor shrinkage in 21% of the patients. One subject with late line CCA had a 15% tumor shrinkage and was on study for over nine months of treatment, while also demonstrating on-target inhibition of expression of PPARα target genes on pharmacodynamic (“PD”) assessment.

In the combination therapy portion of the trial, 15 evaluable patients with heavily pretreated RCC, HCC and CCA were treated with oral twice-daily amezalpat and the anti-PD-1 therapy, nivolumab. All the HCC and RCC patients had received an approved anti-PD-1 therapy in at least one prior line of therapy and discontinued that treatment due to disease progression. We observed objective responses (RECIST v1.1) in two patients with late-line RCC who had previously progressed on anti-PD-1 therapy without having achieved an objective response (ORR 50%, n=2/4, in evaluable RCC patients), and we observed mixed response in a third RCC IO-refractory patient with significant reduction (>30%) in the target lesion, but the appearance of new disease precluded designation as a RECIST PR. A third RECIST response was observed in a patient with late-line, heavily pre-treated CCA, a tumor type generally not responsive to anti-PD-1 therapy alone. All the RECIST responses were observed at the two highest doses.

Notably, one RCC patient who achieved a response after treatment with amezalpat and nivolumab had previously been treated with nivolumab in combination with ipilimumab without experiencing an objective response and progressed on treatment, followed by further progression of cancer on both cabozantinib and everolimus. The initial RECIST PR was seen at the first on-study assessment at eight weeks and included a response in all target lesions as well as complete radiographic resolution of multiple sites of metastatic disease (see CT scan below) and has been confirmed at subsequent assessments beyond 12 months.

Partial Response in Late-Line RCC Patient Treated with amezalpat

and Nivolumab Combination Therapy

Randomized Data in HCC

As of an updated February 14, 2024 data cutoff date, the ongoing global randomized Phase 1b/2 trial of amezalpat, combined with the standard-of-care first-line regimen of atezolizumab and bevacizumab continued to show positive results in patients with advanced or metastatic HCC. The study is comparing the amezalpat arm to standard of care alone, and enrolled 40 patients randomized to the amezalpat arm and 30 patients randomized to the control arm. With 10 additional months of follow-up since the April 2023 primary analysis, the median OS in the amezalpat arm reached 21 months, representing a 6-month improvement over the 15-month OS in the control arm. Importantly, the HR remained stable, demonstrating a sustained reduction in the relative risk of death compared to the control arm.

At the data cutoff date, 50% (20/40) of patients in the amezalpat arm remained in survival follow-up versus 30% (9/30) in the control arm. We believe this reinforces the meaningful clinical benefit observed in this population, with OS serving as the primary endpoint for regulatory approval globally for first-line HCC.

The confirmed ORR for the amezalpat arm remained consistent at 30%, compared to 13.3% in the control arm. Notably, one patient in the amezalpat arm who had previously achieved a PR as of April 2023 converted to a CR by February 2024, with at least an 80% reduction in tumor burden. This patient, despite having a PD-L1 score <1% and an immune desert phenotype, achieved a CR with the addition of amezalpat, highlighting its potential efficacy in hard-to-treat tumors.

1. Data not provided by Roche

Additionally in biomarker subpopulation analyses, patients with b-catenin activating mutations (21% of the study population) showed an increased confirmed ORR of 43% and a disease control rate (“DCR”) of 100% in the amezalpat arm. The triplet regimen with amezalpat remained active across PD-L1 negative tumors, with a confirmed ORR of 27% in the amezalpat arm, compared to a reduced ORR of 7% for the control arm.

Early in the development of amezalpat, given the expression profile and attributes of PPARα, we selected HCC, RCC and CCA as cancers of interest and checkpoint inhibitors and anti-angiogenic therapeutics as potential companion therapies with the goal to maximize the opportunity to bring meaningful benefit to patients with these cancers. Based on the pre-clinical and clinical data released to date, we believe that the emerging clinical benefit profile of amezalpat for patients shows alignment with these predictions, and we look forward to the potential benefit amezalpat could bring to patients with these cancers.

We own worldwide rights to amezalpat, and have filed and been issued patents, including composition of matter, pharmaceutical compositions, and related methods of use, which are expected to expire between December 2033 and November 2043, without giving effect to any patent term extensions.

TPST-1495: Dual EP2/EP4 Prostaglandin Receptor Antagonist

Our second clinical product candidate is TPST-1495, a potentially first-in-class, oral, small molecule dual antagonist of the prostaglandin E2 (“PGE2”), receptors, EP2 and EP4. TPST-1495 is engineered to inhibit only these receptors while sparing the homologous - but differentially active - EP1 and EP3 receptors.

There is extensive literature demonstrating that PGE2 both enhances tumor proliferation and inhibits anti-cancer immune function; it is known from the scientific literature that many tumors express elevated levels of the cyclooxygenase enzymes that produce PGE2. Elevated expression of COX-2 and overproduction of PGE2 is correlated with progression of diverse malignancies by stimulating tumor cell proliferation, survival, evasion and metastasis as well as host angiogenesis. In addition, PGE2 suppresses anti-tumor immunity by inhibiting the function of critical anti-tumor immune effector cell populations such as dendritic cells, natural killer (“NK cells”), T cells, and M1 macrophages, while promoting the activity of suppressive immune cell populations including myeloid-derived suppressor cells (“MDSCs”), M2 macrophages, and regulatory T cells. Recent studies have also shown that increased expression of COX-2 and production of PGE2 can play a role in the effectiveness of immune checkpoint inhibitor therapy and in the development of adaptive resistance to therapy. This body of literature provides the scientific rationale for developing therapeutics that maximally inhibit the prostaglandin pathway, as well as for combining TPST-1495 with immune checkpoint inhibitor monoclonal antibodies.

We conducted preclinical studies to evaluate TPST-1495, including its ability to reverse PGE2-mediated suppression of primary human monocyte to dendritic cell differentiation and activation in vitro, as well as comparisons to other agents designed to operate in the same pathway such as a single EP4 antagonist and, as described, COX2.

We have also conducted preclinical studies to evaluate TPST-1495 in a spontaneous APCMin/+ mouse model of FAP that demonstrated a significant survival advantage in comparison to other inhibitors in the prostaglandin pathway.

Source: Francica et al., Cancer Res Commun; 3(8) August 2023 https://doi.org/10.1158/2767-9764.CRC-23-0249

Overview of Ongoing TPST-1495 Clinical Trials

TPST-1495 was evaluated in a first-in-human, Phase 1, multicenter, open-label, schedule and dose optimization trial in subjects with late-stage solid tumor cancers that are deemed incurable. Study objectives include evaluation of safety, tolerability, PK, PD, and preliminary anti-tumor activity of TPST-1495 as monotherapy and in combination with the checkpoint inhibitor, pembrolizumab. TPST-1495 has been evaluated on a once daily (“QD”) or twice daily (“BID”) schedule and with continuous

or intermittent administration as monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab. Results from the Phase 1 study were presented at ASCO 2023. The data showed that in a diverse and treatment-refractory patient population, treatment with TPST-1495 as a monotherapy and in combination with pembrolizumab resulted in tumor shrinkage and prolonged stable disease in certain patients with a monotherapy safety profile on the recommended QD schedule that was tolerable, with predominantly Grade 1-2 treatment related adverse events (“TRAEs”). For the combination with pembrolizumab, Grade 1-3 TRAEs were reported.

Our preclinical results in the APCMin/+ lead us to consider the application of TPST-1495 in familial adenomatous polyposis syndrome (“FAP”). FAP is a hereditary condition characterized by the development of numerous polyps in the colon and rectum. These polyps have the potential to become cancerous if left untreated. FAP is caused by mutations in the APC gene, which normally helps regulate cell growth and division in the intestinal lining. Individuals with FAP have a significantly increased risk of developing colorectal cancer at a young age, often before the age of 40. Additionally, FAP can lead to the development of polyps in other parts of the gastrointestinal tract, as well as other non-gastrointestinal tumors. Management of FAP typically involves regular surveillance with colonoscopies and surgical intervention to remove the polyps and reduce the risk of cancer. Currently, there are no systemic therapies approved to treat FAP. We are working with CP-CTNet on an NCI-funded Phase 2 study, which we expect will begin this year.

As of December 31, 2024, we own worldwide rights to TPST-1495, and our issued United States patents covering TPST-1495 as compositions of matter, pharmaceutical compositions and related methods of use, are expected to expire between April 2038 and April 2039, without giving effect to any patent term adjustments or patent term extensions for regulatory delay.

Discovery Research

Our Discovery Research team is dedicated to identifying and validating novel therapeutic targets in oncology. We are not bound to a single technology platform, which allows us the scientific freedom to pursue targets and modalities that we believe have the highest probability to benefit patients. Rigorous medicinal chemistry and a broad set of preclinical validation studies are conducted to further evaluate lead compounds and inform decision-making for advancement into clinical development. Collaboration with academic institutions, contract research organizations (“CROs”), and strategic partners provides opportunity to enrich our pipeline, as well, enhancing our ability to deliver innovative medicines to address unmet medical needs.

License Agreements

Roche Collaboration Agreement

In February 2021, we entered into a collaboration agreement with F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. (“Roche”) to accelerate the development of amezalpat into a global, first-line, randomized study. The companies are evaluating amezalpat in a Phase 1b/2 clinical study in combination with the standard-of-care first-line regimen of atezolizumab and bevacizumab in patients with advanced or metastatic HCC, not previously treated with systemic therapy. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, Roche is managing the study operations for the trial, and we retain global development and commercialization rights to amezalpat. Pursuant to the agreement, Roche provides us with notice of the amount of amezalpat required and the delivery timeline, and we supply the amezalpat. All rights to invention and discoveries relating solely to amezalpat or biomarkers solely related to amezalpat made during any study will be our exclusive property. All data generated in the performance of any study under the collaboration agreement will be the property of Roche, but we are entitled to use the data for any lawful purpose.

The agreement applies on a study-by-study basis until the last treatment of the last patient in a study receiving amezalpat in accordance with the protocol for such study or until the termination of this collaboration agreement by either party. Each party has the right to terminate the collaboration agreement upon 60 days prior written notice to the other party. Upon any termination of the agreement, neither we nor Roche will be entitled to any compensation, damages or other payment. If any individual study supplement is terminated, Roche must return all unused amezalpat to us free of charge or destroy such product at our request.

Roche Master Clinical Supply Agreement

In October 2024, we entered into a master clinical supply agreement (“Roche Supply Agreement”) with Roche, pursuant to which Roche will supply Roche’s atezolizumab (TECENTRIQ) for use in one or more clinical studies conducted by us involving amezalpat in combination with atezolizumab, in each case, in accordance with the applicable study protocol prepared by us and reviewed by Roche. Under the Roche Supply Agreement, the parties may execute one or more clinical supply agreement supplements (each, a “CSA Supplement”) that will set forth the study to be conducted by us, the quantities of atezolizumab to be supplied by Roche for such study, and the delivery timeline for such quantities of atezolizumab. In October 2024, we entered into a CSA Supplement for Roche to supply atezolizumab to us, free of charge, for use in our planned Phase 3 trial.

Sales and Marketing

We intend to retain significant development and commercial rights to our product candidates and, if marketing approval is obtained, to commercialize our product candidates on our own, or potentially with a partner, in the United States and other regions. We currently have no sales, marketing or commercial product distribution capabilities. We intend to build the necessary infrastructure and capabilities over time for the United States, and potentially other regions, following further advancement of our product candidates. Clinical data, the size of the addressable patient population, the size of the commercial infrastructure and manufacturing needs may all influence or alter our commercialization plans. If we build a commercial infrastructure to support marketing in North America, such commercial infrastructure could be expected to include a targeted sales force supported by sales management, internal sales support, an internal marketing group and distribution support. To develop the appropriate commercial infrastructure internally, we would have to invest financial and management resources, some of which would have to be deployed prior to any confirmation that one of our product candidates will be approved.

Manufacturing

We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates obtain marketing approval. We also rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to package, label, store and distribute our investigational product candidates, as well as for our commercial products if marketing approval is obtained. We have internal personnel and utilize consultants with extensive technical, manufacturing, analytical and quality experience to oversee contract manufacturing and testing activities. We will continue to expand and strengthen our network of third-party providers but may also consider investing in internal manufacturing capabilities in the future if there is a technical need, or a strategic or financial benefit.

Manufacturing is subject to extensive regulations that impose procedural and documentation requirements. At a minimum these regulations govern record keeping, manufacturing processes and controls, personnel, quality control and quality assurance. Our systems, procedures and contractors are required to comply with these regulations and are assessed through regular monitoring and formal audits.

Competition

The biopharmaceutical and immuno-oncology industries are characterized by intense competition and rapid innovation. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will have to compete with existing and future new therapies. While we believe that our technology, development experience and scientific knowledge provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including large and specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions, government agencies and public and private research institutions that conduct research, seek patent protection, and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization.

If amezalpat, TPST-1495, or any future product candidates are approved for the treatment of tumors, they may compete with other products used to treat such diseases. There are a variety of treatments used for cancerous tumors that include chemotherapy drugs, small molecules, monoclonal antibodies, antibody-drug conjugates, bi-specific antibodies, cell therapies, oncolytic viruses and vaccines, as well as other approaches. In addition, there are several competitors in clinical development for the treatment of

HCC, RCC, cholangiocarcinoma, and other indications that we may be targeting with amezalpat and TPST-1495, including companies such as Ono, Adlai Nortye, Merck, Roche, Exelixis, and AstraZeneca.

Amezalpat, our small molecule designed to be a selective antagonist of PPARα, is the first PPARα antagonist in the clinic. We are not aware of other companies developing such an antagonist. For TPST-1495, our small molecule designed to be a dual antagonist of the EP2 and EP4 receptor, we are aware of other clinical-stage EP-4-only antagonists being developed by Adlai Nortye and Ono.

Many of our competitors, either alone or with strategic partners, have substantially greater financial, technical and human resources than we do. Accordingly, our competitors may be more successful than us in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining approval for treatments and achieving widespread market acceptance, rendering our treatments obsolete or non-competitive. Merger and acquisition activity in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. These companies also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials and acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies.

Our commercial opportunity could be substantially limited if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are more effective, safer, less toxic, more convenient or less expensive than our comparable products. In geographies that are critical to our commercial success, competitors may also obtain regulatory approvals before us, resulting in our competitors building a strong market position in advance of the entry of our products. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all our programs are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience and availability of reimbursement. In addition, our ability to compete may be affected in many cases by insurers or other third-party payors seeking to encourage the use of generic drugs.

Intellectual Property

We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to our business, including obtaining, maintaining, and defending our patent rights. Our policy is to seek to protect our proprietary position by, among other methods, filing patent applications and obtaining issued patents in the United States and in markets outside of the United States directed to our proprietary technology, inventions, improvements, and product candidates that are important to the development and implementation of our business. We also rely on trade secrets and know-how relating to our proprietary technology and product candidates and continuing innovation to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in the field of oncology. We also plan to rely on data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions when available. Our commercial success will depend in part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent and other proprietary protection for our technology, inventions, improvements, and product candidates; to preserve the confidentiality of our trade secrets; to defend and enforce our proprietary rights, including any patents that we may own or license in the future; and to operate without infringing on the valid and enforceable patents and other proprietary rights of third parties.

As of December 31, 2024, our patent portfolio consisted of issued patents and pending patent applications that we own or in-licensed related to amezalpat, TPST-1495 and various other compounds and programs, such as our earlier-stage research programs. In total, as of the same date, we owned or in-licensed nine issued United States patents, eleven pending United States patent applications, four pending Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) applications, and in various markets outside of the United States, including Europe, China and Japan: 55 issued patents and 13 pending patent applications.

With respect to amezalpat, as of December 31, 2024, we own issued patents and pending patent applications in the United States, Europe, China, Japan, and other markets outside of the United States as well as one pending PCT application. The issued United States patents covering amezalpat as compositions of matter, pharmaceutical compositions, and related methods of use are expected to expire in December 2033, absent any patent term adjustments or patent term extensions for regulatory delay. Any additional patents that may issue from these pending patent applications are expected to expire between December 2033 and May 2045, absent any patent term adjustments or patent term extensions for regulatory delay.

With respect to TPST-1495, as of December 31, 2024, we own issued patents and pending patent applications in the United States, Europe, China, Japan, and other markets outside of the United States as well as one pending PCT application. The issued United State patents covering TPST-1495 as compositions of matter, pharmaceutical compositions, and related methods of use are expected to expire between April 2038 and April 2039, absent any patent term adjustments or patent term extensions for regulatory delay. Any additional patents that may issue from these pending patent applications are expected to expire between April 2038 and June 2045, absent any patent term adjustments or patent term extensions for regulatory delay.

As of December 31, 2024, our patent portfolio also included pending patent applications in the United States and Europe that are exclusively licensed to us by the University of California at Berkeley. The licensed patent applications do not cover any of our current product candidates.

We also possess substantial know-how and trade secrets relating to the development and commercialization of our product candidates, including related manufacturing processes and technology.

With respect to our product candidates and processes that we intend to develop and commercialize in the normal course of business, we intend to pursue patent protection covering, when possible, compositions, methods of use, dosing, and formulations. We may also pursue patent protection with respect to manufacturing and drug development processes and technologies.

Issued patents can provide protection for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In general, patents issued for patent applications filed in the United States can provide exclusionary rights for 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. The term of United States patents may be extended by delays encountered during prosecution that are caused by the USPTO, also known as patent term adjustment. In addition, in certain instances, the term of an issued United States patent that covers or claims an FDA approved product can be extended to recapture a portion of the term effectively lost as a result of the FDA regulatory review period, which is called patent term extension. The restoration period cannot be longer than five years and the total patent term, including the restoration period, must not exceed 14 years following FDA approval. The term of patents outside of the United States varies in accordance with the laws of the foreign jurisdiction but typically is also 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

The patent positions of companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. No consistent policy regarding the scope of claims allowable in patents in the field of oncology has emerged in the United States. The relevant patent laws and their interpretation outside of the United States are also uncertain. Changes in either the patent laws or their interpretation in the United States and other countries may diminish our ability to protect our technology or product candidates and could affect the value of such intellectual property. In particular, our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell, or importing products that infringe our intellectual property will depend in part on our success in obtaining and enforcing patent claims that cover our technology, inventions, and improvements. We cannot guarantee that patents will be granted with respect to any of its pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications we may file in the future, nor can we be sure that any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting its products, the methods of use or manufacture of those products.

Moreover, even its issued patents may not guarantee us the right to practice our technology in relation to the commercialization of its products. Patent and other intellectual property rights in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology space are evolving and involve many risks and uncertainties. For example, third parties may have blocking patents that could be used to prevent us from commercializing our product candidates and practicing our proprietary technology, and our issued patents may be challenged, invalidated, or circumvented, which could limit our ability to stop competitors from marketing related products or could limit the term of patent protection that otherwise may exist for its product candidates. In addition, the scope of the rights granted under any issued patents may not provide us with protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar technology.

Furthermore, our competitors may independently develop similar technologies that are outside the scope of the rights granted under any issued patents. For these reasons, we may face competition with respect to our product candidates. Moreover, because of the extensive time required for development, testing, and regulatory review of a potential product, it is possible that, before any particular product candidate can be commercialized, any patent protection for such product may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the commercial advantage the patent provides.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States at the federal, state and local level and in other countries and jurisdictions extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of pharmaceutical products, such as our investigational medicines and any future investigational medicines. Generally, before a new pharmaceutical product can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating its quality, safety and efficacy must be obtained, organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority.

FDA Approval Process

In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FFDCA”), and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as clinical hold, FDA refusal to approve pending a New Drug Applications (“NDA”) warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties and criminal prosecution.

Our investigational medicines and any future investigational medicines must be approved by the FDA pursuant to an NDA before they may be legally marketed in the United States. The process generally involves the following:

•

Completion of extensive preclinical laboratory and animal studies in accordance with applicable regulations, including studies conducted in accordance with Good Laboratory Practice (“GLP”) requirements;

•

Submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin;

•

Approval by an Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) or independent ethics committee at each clinical trial site before each clinical trial may be commenced;

•

Performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials in accordance with applicable Investigational New Drug (“IND”) regulations, Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”) requirements and other clinical trial-related regulations to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product for each proposed indication;

•

Submission to the FDA of an NDA;

•

Payment of any user fees for FDA review of an NDA;

•

A determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA to accept the filing for review;

•

Satisfactory completion of one or more FDA pre-approval inspections of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the drug, or components thereof, will be produced to assess compliance with Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”) requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity;

•

Satisfactory completion of any potential FDA audits of the clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the NDA to assure compliance with GCPs and integrity of the clinical data;

•

FDA review and approval of an NDA, including consideration of the views of any FDA advisory committee; and

•

Compliance with any post-approval requirements, including risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”), where applicable, and post-approval studies required by the FDA as a condition of approval.

The preclinical and clinical testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for our product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, or at all.

Preclinical Studies

Before testing any drug product candidates in humans, the product candidate must undergo rigorous preclinical testing. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess the potential for adverse events and in some cases to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including GLP. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and plans for clinical studies, among other things, to the FDA as part of an IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. Some long-term preclinical testing may continue after an IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence.

Clinical Trials

Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator, generally a physician not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with GCP, an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of patients and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated in the trial. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND.

Furthermore, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed.

There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trial results to public registries. Information about certain clinical trials, including clinical trial results, must be submitted within specific timeframes for publication on the www.clinicaltrials.gov website. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, clinical trial sites and investigators and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Disclosure of the results of these clinical trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial.

A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the United States may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, the sponsor may submit data from the clinical trial to the FDA in support of an NDA. The FDA will accept a well-designed and well-conducted foreign clinical

trial not conducted under an IND if the clinical trial was conducted in accordance with GCP requirements, and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary.

Clinical trials are generally conducted in three sequential phases, known as Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3:

•

Phase 1 clinical trials generally involve a small number of healthy volunteers or disease-affected patients who are initially exposed to a single dose and then multiple doses of the product candidate. The primary purpose of these clinical trials is to assess the metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacologic action, side effect tolerability, safety of the product candidate, and, if possible, early evidence of effectiveness.

•

Phase 2 clinical trials generally involve studies in disease-affected patients to evaluate proof of concept and/or determine the dosing regimen(s) for subsequent investigations. At the same time, safety and further pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information is collected, possible adverse effects and safety risks are identified, and a preliminary evaluation of efficacy is conducted.

•

Phase 3 clinical trials generally involve a large number of patients at multiple sites and are designed to provide the data necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of the product for its intended use, its safety in use and to establish the overall benefit/risk relationship of the product and provide an adequate basis for product labeling. In most cases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug.

These Phases may overlap or be combined. For example, a Phase 1/2 clinical trial may contain both a dose-escalation stage and a dose expansion stage, the latter of which may confirm tolerability at the recommended dose for expansion in future clinical trials (as in traditional Phase 1 clinical trials) and provide insight into the anti-tumor effects of the investigational therapy in selected subpopulation(s).

Typically, during the development of oncology therapies, all subjects enrolled in Phase 1 clinical trials are disease-affected patients and, as a result, considerably more information on clinical activity may be collected during such trials than during Phase 1 clinical trials for non-oncology therapies. A single Phase 3 or Phase 2 trial with other confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in rare instances to provide substantial evidence of effectiveness (generally subject to the requirement of additional post-approval studies). The manufacturer of an investigational drug in a phase 2 or 3 clinical trial for a serious or life-threatening disease is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on evaluating and responding to requests for expanded access.

Phase 1, Phase 2, Phase 3 and other types of clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including non-compliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Additionally, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group provides authorization for whether a trial may move forward at designated checkpoints based on access to certain data from the trial.

Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product and, among other things, companies must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality, potency and purity of the final product. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the investigational medicines do not undergo unacceptable deterioration over their shelf life.

FDA Review Process

After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of an NDA is required before marketing of the product may begin in the U.S. An NDA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture and controls. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA. FDA approval of an NDA must be obtained before a drug may be marketed in the United States. The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA is substantial. Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”), each NDA must be accompanied by a substantial user fee. The FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication. The applicant under an approved NDA is also subject to an annual program fee.

The FDA reviews each submitted NDA before it determines whether to file it and may request additional information. The FDA must make a decision on whether to file an NDA within 60 days of receipt, and such decision could include a refusal to file by the FDA. Once the submission is filed, the FDA begins an in-depth review of an NDA. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of an NDA. Most applications for standard review drug products are reviewed within ten to twelve months; most applications for priority review drugs are reviewed in six to eight months. Priority review can be applied to drugs that the FDA determines may offer significant improvement in safety or effectiveness compared to marketed products or where no adequate therapy exists. The review process for both standard and priority review may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission. The FDA does not always meet its goal dates for standard and priority timeframes for an NDA, and the review process can be extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

The FDA may also refer applications for novel drug products, or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an outside advisory committee—typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts—for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions, if any. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA will conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities for the new product to determine whether they comply with cGMP requirements. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. The FDA also typically inspects clinical trial sites to ensure compliance with GCP requirements and the integrity of the data supporting safety and efficacy.

After the FDA evaluates an NDA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter (“CRL”), generally outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing, or information, in order for the FDA to reconsider the application, such as additional clinical data, additional pivotal clinical trial(s), and/or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, preclinical studies or manufacturing. If a CRL is issued, the applicant may resubmit an NDA addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, withdraw the application, engage in formal dispute resolution or request an opportunity for a hearing. The FDA has committed to reviewing resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that an NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval.

As a potential condition of an NDA approval, the FDA may require a REMS to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks to patients. A REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals and elements to assure a product’s safe use (“ETASU”). An ETASU can include, but is not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing the product, dispensing the product only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient-specific registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. Moreover, the FDA may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the product’s safety or efficacy.

Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of an NDA supplement or, in some case, a new NDA, before the change can be implemented. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs.

Orphan Drug Designation

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to drugs intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product in the United States.

Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process.

If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a seven-year exclusive marketing period in the U.S. for that product, for that indication. During the seven-year exclusivity period, the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same disease, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity by means of greater effectiveness, greater safety, or providing a major contribution to patient care, or in instances of drug supply issues. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition. Other benefits of orphan drug designation include tax credits for certain research and an exemption from the NDA user fee.

Expedited Development and Review Programs

The FDA is authorized to designate certain products for expedited review if they are intended to address an unmet medical need in the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition.

Fast Track Designation

Fast track designation may be granted for products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition for which there is no effective treatment and preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Fast track designation applies to both the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor of an investigational drug product may request that the FDA designate the drug candidate for a specific indication as a fast track drug concurrent with, or after, the submission of the IND for the drug candidate. The FDA must determine if the drug candidate qualifies for fast track designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. For fast track products, sponsors may have greater interactions with the FDA and the FDA may initiate review of sections of a fast track product’s NDA before the application is complete. This rolling review is available if the FDA determines, after preliminary evaluation of clinical data submitted by the sponsor, that a fast track product may be effective. The sponsor must also provide, and the FDA must approve, a schedule for the submission of the remaining information and the sponsor must pay applicable user fees. At the time of an NDA filing, the FDA will determine whether to grant priority review designation. Additionally, fast track designation may be withdrawn if the FDA believes that the designation is no longer supported by data emerging in the clinical trial process.

Breakthrough Therapy Designation

Breakthrough therapy designation may be granted for products that are intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. Under the breakthrough therapy program, the sponsor of a new drug candidate may request that the FDA designate the candidate for a

specific indication as a breakthrough therapy concurrent with, or after, the submission of an IND for the drug candidate. The FDA must determine if the drug product qualifies for breakthrough therapy designation within 60 days of receipt of the sponsor’s request. The FDA may take certain actions with respect to breakthrough therapies, including holding meetings with the sponsor throughout the development process, providing timely advice to the product sponsor regarding development and approval, involving more senior staff in the review process, assigning a cross-disciplinary project lead for the review team and taking other steps to design the clinical studies in an efficient manner.

Priority Review

Priority review may be granted for products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety and effectiveness compared to available therapies. The FDA will attempt to direct additional resources to the evaluation of an application designated for priority review in an effort to facilitate the review.

Accelerated Approval

Accelerated approval may be granted for products that are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and that generally provide a meaningful therapeutic advantage to patients over existing treatments. A product eligible for accelerated approval may be approved on the basis of either a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. In clinical trials, a surrogate endpoint is a measurement of laboratory or clinical signs of a disease or condition that substitutes for a direct measurement of how a patient feels, functions or survives. The accelerated approval pathway is most often used in settings in which the course of a disease is long, and an extended period of time is required to measure the intended clinical benefit of a product, even if the effect on the surrogate or intermediate clinical endpoint occurs rapidly. Thus, accelerated approval has been used extensively in the development and approval of products for treatment of a variety of cancers in which the goal of therapy is generally to improve survival or decrease morbidity and the duration of the typical disease course requires lengthy and sometimes large studies to demonstrate a clinical or survival benefit. The accelerated approval pathway is contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence and, in some cases, the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated and/or fully enrolled prior to approval. Failure to conduct required post-approval studies, or to confirm a clinical benefit during post-marketing studies, would allow the FDA to withdraw the product from the market on an expedited basis. All promotional materials for product candidates approved under accelerated regulations are subject to prior review by the FDA.

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or the time period for FDA review or approval may not be shortened. Furthermore, fast track designation, breakthrough therapy designation, priority review and accelerated approval do not change the standards for approval but may expedite the development or approval process.

Pediatric Information

Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (“PREA”), an NDA or supplements to an NDA must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. Unless otherwise required by regulation, PREA does not apply to any drug for an indication for which orphan designation has been granted, with certain exceptions.

The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (“BPCA”) provides NDA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity—patent or nonpatent—for a drug if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, the FDA

making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications under the BPCA are treated as priority applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers.

Post-Approval Requirements

Once an NDA is approved, a product will be subject to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in a manner consistent with the approved labeling.

Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports are required following FDA approval of an NDA. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as phase 4 testing, REMS, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or the FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging and labeling procedures must continue to conform to cGMP after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the Agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMP. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with cGMP. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered.

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

•

Restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, suspension of the approval, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or a product recall;

•

Fines, warning or other enforcement-related letters or holds on post-approval clinical studies;

•

Refusal of the FDA to approve pending NDAs or supplements to approved NDAs, or suspension or revocation of product license approvals;

•

Product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; or

•

Injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties.

The Hatch-Waxman Act Orange Book Listing

Under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch Waxman Amendments, NDA applicants are required to identify to the FDA each patent whose claims cover the applicant’s drug or approved method of using the drug. Upon approval of a drug, the applicant must update its listing of patents to the NDA in timely fashion and each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book.

Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”). An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active ingredient(s),

strength, route of administration, and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown through bioequivalence testing to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug. An approved ANDA product is considered to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or submit results of, pre-clinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Drugs approved under the ANDA pathway are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug pursuant to each state’s laws on drug substitution.

The ANDA applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents identified for the reference listed drug in the Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify to each patent in one of the following ways: (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. For patents listed that claim an approved method of use, under certain circumstances the ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a section viii statement certifying that its proposed ANDA label does not contain (or carves out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents through a Paragraph IV certification, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA-holder and patentee(s) once the ANDA has been accepted for filing by the FDA (referred to as the “notice letter”). The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice letter. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months from the date the notice letter is received, expiration of the patent, the date of a settlement order or consent decree signed and entered by the court stating that the patent that is the subject of the certification is invalid or not infringed, or a decision in the patent case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant.

The ANDA application also will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired. In some instances, an ANDA applicant may receive approval prior to expiration of certain non-patent exclusivity if the applicant seeks, and the FDA permits, the omission of such exclusivity-protected information from the ANDA prescribing information.

Exclusivity

Upon an NDA approval of a new chemical entity (“NCE”), which is a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by the FDA in any other NDA, that drug receives five years of marketing exclusivity during which the FDA cannot receive any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug unless the application contains a Paragraph IV certification, in which case the application may be submitted one year prior to expiration of the NCE exclusivity. If there is no listed patent in the Orange Book, there may not be a Paragraph IV certification, and, thus, no ANDA for a generic version of the drug may be filed before the expiration of the exclusivity period.

Certain changes to an approved drug, such as the approval of a new indication, the approval of a new strength, and the approval of a new condition of use, are associated with a three-year period of exclusivity from the date of approval during which the FDA cannot approve an ANDA for a generic drug that includes the change. In some instances, an ANDA applicant may receive approval prior to expiration of the three-year exclusivity if the applicant seeks, and the FDA permits, the omission of such exclusivity-protected information from the ANDA package insert.

Patent Term Extension

The Hatch Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. Patent term extension, however, cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. After an NDA approval, owners of relevant drug patents may apply for the extension. The allowable patent term extension is calculated as half of the drug’s testing phase (the time between an IND application and an NDA

submission) and all of the review phase (the time between an NDA submission and approval) up to a maximum of five years. The time can be reduced for any time the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence.

The United States Patent and Trademark Office (“USPTO”), in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. However, the USPTO may not grant an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable time period or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than requested.

The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years, and only one patent can be extended. The application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent, and for patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the USPTO must determine that approval of the drug covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for a drug for which an NDA has not been submitted.

Coverage, Pricing, and Reimbursement

In the United States and in foreign markets, sales of pharmaceutical products depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors provide coverage and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such products. In the United States, third-party payors include federal and state healthcare programs, private managed care providers, health insurers and other organizations. Adequate coverage and reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid in the United States, and commercial payors are critical to new product acceptance.

There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, for example, principal decisions about reimbursement for new products are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”), an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”). CMS decides whether and to what extent a new product will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare, and private third-party payors often follow CMS’s decisions regarding coverage and reimbursement to a substantial degree. In the United States, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. Decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for each of our product candidates will be made on a plan-by-plan basis. One payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement, for the product. Additionally, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our product candidates to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. Coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we or our collaborators receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. Further, such payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of medical product candidates. There may be especially significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific product candidates on an approved list, known as a formulary, which might not include all FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication.

Outside the United States, the commercialization of therapeutics is generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost containment initiatives in Europe, Canada and other countries has, and will continue to, put pressure on the pricing and usage of therapeutics such as our product candidates.

Other Healthcare Laws

In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, several other types of state and federal laws have been applied to restrict certain general business and marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry in recent years. These laws include anti-kickback statutes, false claims statutes and other healthcare laws and regulations.

The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce, or in return for, purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any healthcare item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or other federally financed healthcare programs. This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers and formulary managers, among others, on the other. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution or other regulatory sanctions, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. In addition, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to commit a violation.

Federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, prohibit any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government, or knowingly making, or causing to be made, a false statement to have a false claim paid. This includes claims made to programs where the federal government reimburses, such as Medicare and Medicaid, as well as programs where the federal government is a direct purchaser, such as when it purchases off the Federal Supply Schedule. Recently, several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly inflating drug prices they report to pricing services, which in turn were used by the government to set Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, and for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. In addition, certain marketing practices, including off-label promotion, may also violate false claims laws. Additionally, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal civil False Claims Act. Most states also have statutes or regulations similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and civil False Claims Act, which apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor.

Other federal statutes pertaining to healthcare fraud and abuse include the civil monetary penalties statute, which prohibits, among other things, the offer or payment of remuneration to a Medicaid or Medicare beneficiary that the offerer or payor knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary to order a receive a reimbursable item or service from a particular supplier, and the additional federal criminal statutes created by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), which prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises any money or property owned by or under the control of any healthcare benefit program in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to commit a violation.

Further, pursuant to the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation (the “Affordable Care Act” or the “ACA”), CMS has issued a final rule that requires manufacturers of prescription drugs to collect and report information on certain payments or transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physicians assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. The reports must be submitted on an annual basis. The reported data is made available in searchable form on a public website on an annual basis. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties.

HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act and its implementing regulations, imposes obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, on covered entities, business associates and their covered subcontractors with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information.

In addition, several states now require prescription drug companies to report certain expenses relating to the marketing and promotion of drug products and to report gifts and payments to individual healthcare practitioners in these states. Other states prohibit various marketing-related activities, such as the provision of certain kinds of gifts or meals. Still other states require the posting of information relating to clinical studies and their outcomes. Some states require the reporting of certain drug pricing information, including information pertaining to and justifying price increases. In addition, states such as California, Connecticut, Nevada and Massachusetts require pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs and/or marketing codes. Several additional states are considering similar proposals. Certain states and local jurisdictions also require the registration of pharmaceutical sales and medical representatives. Compliance with these laws is difficult and time consuming, and companies that do not comply with these state laws face civil penalties.

Efforts to ensure that business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations involve substantial costs. If a drug company’s operations are found to be in violation of any such requirements, it may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of its operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA, exclusion from participation in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other federal or state government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, imprisonment, and reputational harm. Although effective compliance programs can mitigate the risk of investigation and prosecution for violations of these laws, these risks cannot be entirely eliminated. Any action for an alleged or suspected violation can cause a drug company to incur significant legal expenses and divert management’s attention from the operation of the business, even if such action is successfully defended.

U.S. Healthcare Reform

In the United States there have been, and continue to be, proposals by the federal government, state governments, regulators and third-party payors to control or manage the increased costs of health care and, more generally, to reform the U.S. healthcare system. The pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. For example, in March 2010, the ACA was enacted, which intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms, substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry.

There have been judicial, executive brand, and Congressional challenges and amendments to certain aspects of the ACA, For example, August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. However, it is possible that the ACA will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how such challenges will impact the ACA. Tempest cannot predict the ultimate content, timing or effect of any healthcare reform legislation or the impact of potential legislation on its business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted to reduce healthcare expenditures. On August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, was enacted which, among other things, included aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute will remain in effect through 2032, unless additional Congressional action is taken.

Recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, the IRA, among other things, (i) directs HHS to negotiate the price of certain high-expenditure, single-source drugs covered under

Medicare that have been on the market for at least seven years, and subject drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” for such drugs and biologics under the law (the “Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program”), and (ii) imposes rebates with respect to certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B or Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. The IRA permits HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. These provisions began to take effect progressively in fiscal year 2023. On August 15, 2024, HHS announced the agreed-upon price of the first ten drugs that were subject to price negotiations, although the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program is currently subject to legal challenges. On January 17, 2025, HHS selected fifteen additional products covered under Part D for price negotiation in 2025. Each year thereafter more Part B and Part D products will become subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, the National Institutes of Health, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. These actions may, for example, include directives to reduce agency workforce, rescinding an executive order tasking the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (“CMMI”) to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending and eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establishing an AI task force and developing a strategic plan. Further, amounts allocated to federal grants and contracts may be reduced or eliminated. These reductions may also impact the ability of relevant agencies to timely review and approve research and development, manufacturing, and marketing activities, which may delay our ability to develop, market and sell any products we may develop. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (“Loper Bright”), the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to current regulations and guidance issued by federal agencies applicable to our operations, including those issued by the FDA. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA.

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

Additionally, on May 30, 2018, the Trickett Wendler, Frank Mongiello, Jordan McLinn, and Matthew Bellina Right to Try Act of 2017 was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a phase 1 clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA authorization under an FDA expanded access program; however, manufacturers are not obligated to provide investigational new drug products under the current federal right to try law.

Employees and Human Capital Resources

As of December 31, 2024, we had 25 employees, including 24 full-time employees and 18 holding Ph.D., M.D., JD, LL.M., MBA and/or M.S. degrees. Our employees have established internal expertise in chemistry, biochemistry, molecular biology, immunology, pharmacology, toxicology, pre-clinical development, regulatory and quality, translational medicine, and early-to-late-stage clinical development, as well as finance, business development and strategic transactions. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered by collective bargaining agreements. We will continue to add experienced and talented scientists in areas, such as medicinal chemistry, that we believe are critical for the discovery of highly differentiated small-molecule compounds.

We consider a number of measures and objectives in managing our human capital assets, including, among others, employee engagement, development and training, talent acquisition and retention, employee safety and wellness, diversity and inclusion,

and compensation and pay equity. We provide our employees with salaries and bonuses intended to be competitive for our industry, opportunities for equity ownership, development programs that enable continued learning and growth and a benefits package to promote well-being across all aspects of their lives, including health care, retirement planning and paid time off. The principal purposes of our equity incentive plans are to attract, retain and motivate selected employees, consultants and directors through the granting of equity-based compensation awards and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives.

We believe that a diverse workforce is important to our success and we are fundamentally committed to creating and maintaining a work environment in which employees are treated fairly, with dignity, decency, respect and in accordance with all applicable laws. We understand that varied perspectives lead to the best ideas and outcomes. We believe that by creating a workplace where every individual can feel welcome and valued, we will be better able to achieve our corporate objectives. All employees must adhere to a code of business conduct and ethics and our employee handbook, which combined, define standards for appropriate behavior. Our recruitment, hiring, development, training, compensation, and advancement is based on qualifications, performance, skills, and experience without regard to gender, gender identity, sexual orientation, race, or ethnicity. People of color and those who are part of underrepresented groups in the biotech industry are encouraged to apply for open positions.

Corporate Information

We were incorporated in Delaware in April 2011. Our corporate headquarters are located at 2000 Sierra Point Parkway, Suite 400, Brisbane, California 94005, and our telephone number is (415) 798-8589.

Available Information

Our internet website address is www.tempesttx.com. In addition to the information about us and our subsidiaries contained in this Annual Report, information about us can be found on our website. Our website and information included in or linked to our website are not part of this Annual Report.

Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are available free of charge through our website as soon as reasonably practicable after they are electronically filed with or furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission (“SEC”). Additionally, the SEC maintains an internet site that contains reports, proxy and information statements and other information. The address of the SEC’s website is www.sec.gov.

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Our business involves significant risks, some of which are described below. You should carefully consider the risks described below, together with all of the other information contained in this Annual Report, including the section entitled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the financial statements and the related notes. Any of these events could cause the trading price of our common stock to decline, which would cause you to lose all or part of your investment. The occurrence of any of the following risks could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and future growth prospects or cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made or may make from time to time.

Summary of Selected Risks Associated with Our Business

Our business is subject to numerous risks and uncertainties, any one of which could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, operating results, and prospects. You should read this summary together with the more detailed description of each risk factor contained below.

•

We will require substantial additional funding to finance our operations, which may not be available on acceptable

terms or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or our operations.

•

We have a history of operating losses, and we may not achieve or sustain profitability. We anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future. If we fail to obtain additional funding to conduct our planned research and development efforts, we could be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our product development programs or commercial development efforts.

•

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish proprietary rights.

•

The terms of the Loan Agreement with Oxford Finance (“Oxford”) provide Oxford with a lien against all of our assets, including our intellectual property, and contains financial covenants and other restrictions on our actions that may limit our operational flexibility or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations.

•

We expect to expand our development and regulatory capabilities, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

•

If we are unable to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize amezalpat, TPST-1495, or any of our future product candidates, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

•

Success in preclinical studies and earlier clinical trials for our product candidates may not be indicative of the results that may be obtained in later clinical trials, which may delay or prevent obtaining regulatory approval.

•

We may not be successful in our efforts to expand our pipeline of product candidates and develop marketable products.

•

The commercial success of our product candidates, including TPST-1495 and amezalpat, will depend upon their degree of market acceptance by providers, patients, patient advocacy groups, third-party payors and the general medical community.

•

We may rely on third parties to manufacture our clinical product supplies, and we may have to rely on third parties to produce and process our product candidates, if approved.

•

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological change, and it is possible that our competitors may achieve regulatory approval before us or develop therapies that are more advanced or effective than ours, which may harm our business, financial condition and ability to successfully market or commercialize TPST-1495, amezalpat, and any future product candidates.

•

If we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our product candidates, we may be unable to generate any revenues.

•

We may not be successful in finding strategic collaborators for continuing development of certain of our future product candidates or successfully commercializing or competing in the market for certain indications.

•

The FDA regulatory approval process is lengthy and time-consuming, and we may experience significant delays in the clinical development and regulatory approval of our product candidates.

•

Our success depends in part on our ability to obtain, maintain and 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 owned and in-licensed patents and patent applications may not provide sufficient protection of our product candidates or result in any competitive advantage.

•

The trading price of the shares of our common stock has been and is likely to continue to be volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.

•

Unstable market and economic conditions may have serious adverse consequences on our business, financial condition and share price.

•

Our common stock is thinly traded and our stockholders may be unable to sell their shares quickly or at market price.

•

If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal controls, our ability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could be impaired.

Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Capital Needs

We will require significant additional funding to finance our operations, which may not be available on acceptable terms or at all. Failure to obtain this necessary capital when needed may force us to delay, limit or terminate our product development efforts or our operations.

Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception. We expect our expenses to continue to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of, and seek marketing approval for, our product candidates, including later stage clinical trials such as our potential pivotal Phase 3 trial in first-line HCC, and advance our other programs. Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. Other unanticipated costs may also arise. Because the design and outcome of our ongoing and anticipated clinical trials are highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amount of resources and funding that will be necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of any product candidate we develop. Moreover, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations and planned research and clinical development activities, including our Phase 3 pivotal trial. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including:

•

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

•

the scope, progress, results and costs of preclinical development, laboratory testing and clinical trials of other product candidates that we may pursue;

•

our ability to establish collaborations on favorable terms, if at all;

•

the costs, timing and outcome of regulatory review of our product candidates;

•

the costs and timing of future commercialization activities, including product manufacturing, marketing, sales, reimbursement and distribution, for any of our product candidates for which we may receive marketing approval;

•

the revenue, if any, received from commercial sales of our product candidates for which we may receive marketing approval;

•

the cost of any milestone and royalty payments with respect to any approved product candidates;

•

the costs and timing of preparing, filing and prosecuting patent applications, maintaining and enforcing our intellectual property rights and defending any intellectual property-related claims;

•

the costs of operating as a public company; and

•

the extent to which we acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies.

We may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval in order to generate revenue from product sales. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for several years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives.

Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. If we require additional capital at a time when investment in our industry or in the marketplace in general is limited, we might not be able to raise funding on favorable terms, if at all. Our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by potential worsening global economic conditions, inflation expectations, and the recent disruptions to and volatility in the credit and financial markets in the United States and worldwide resulting from public health crises and geopolitical tensions. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce, or explore other strategic options for our research and development programs or other opportunities. If we do not obtain additional financing and are required to terminate our operations, our stockholders will lose their investment.

Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish proprietary rights.

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our cash needs through public or private equity or debt financings, third-party funding, marketing and distribution arrangements, as well as other collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements, or any combination of these approaches. We do not have any committed external source of funds. In June 2024, entered into a sales agreement with Jefferies LLC (“Jefferies”) for an at-the-market offering program (the “ATM Program”). Pursuant to the prospectus supplement we filed in February 2025, we may sell up to an aggregate of $14.5 million of our common stock under our ATM Program. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest may be further diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a stockholder. In addition, we may issue equity or debt securities as consideration for obtaining rights to additional compounds.

Debt and equity financings, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as redeeming our shares, making investments, incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or placing limitations on our ability to acquire, sell or license intellectual property rights and other operating restrictions that could negatively impact our ability to conduct our business. For example, our obligations under the Loan Agreement with Oxford are secured by a security interest in all of our assets, including our intellectual property. In addition, the Loan Agreement contains customary covenants that, subject to specific exceptions, restrict our ability to, among other things, declare dividends or redeem or repurchase equity interests, incur additional liens, make loans and investments, incur additional indebtedness, engage in mergers, acquisitions and asset sales, transact with affiliates, undergo a change in control, add or change business locations, or engage in businesses that are not related to its existing business.

In addition, if we raise additional capital through future collaborations, strategic alliances or third-party licensing arrangements, we may have to relinquish future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates, or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us.

If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our drug development or future commercialization efforts, or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise develop and market ourselves.

Our ability to raise capital may be limited by applicable laws and regulations.

Using a shelf registration statement on Form S-3 to raise additional capital generally takes less time and is less expensive than other means, such as conducting an offering under a Form S-1 registration statement. However, our ability to raise capital using a shelf registration statement may be limited by, among other things, SEC rules and regulations. Under SEC rules and regulations, if our public float (the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates) is less than $75.0 million, then the aggregate

market value of securities sold by us or on our behalf under our Form S-3 in any 12-month period is limited to an aggregate of one-third of our public float. As our public float is currently less than $75.0 million, we are currently subject to this limitation. If our ability to utilize a Form S-3 registration statement for a primary offering of our securities continues to be limited to one-third of our public float, we may need to conduct such an offering pursuant to an exemption from registration under the Securities Act or under a Form S-1 registration statement, which would increase the cost of raising additional capital relative to utilizing a Form S-3 registration statement.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Biotechnology product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. Our operations to date have been limited primarily to organizing and staffing, business planning, raising capital, acquiring and developing product and technology rights, manufacturing, and conducting research and development activities for our product candidates. We have never generated any revenue from product sales, and we have not obtained regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates. We incurred net losses of $41.8 million and $29.5 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $207.1 million. Substantially all of our operating losses have resulted from costs incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to continue to incur significant expenses and operating losses over the next several years and for the foreseeable future as we continue to conduct research and development, clinical testing, regulatory compliance activities, manufacturing activities, and, if any of our product candidates is approved, sales and marketing activities. Our prior losses, combined with our expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital.

The terms of the Loan Agreement with Oxford provide Oxford with a lien against all of our assets, including our intellectual property, and contains financial covenants and other restrictions on our actions that may limit our operational flexibility or otherwise adversely affect our results of operations.

In January 2021, we entered into a Loan Agreement with Oxford that provided us with up to $35.0 million of borrowing capacity across three potential tranches, which was subsequently amended in December 2022. The initial tranche of $15.0 million was funded at the closing of the Loan Agreement, of which $5.0 million was repaid in December 2022. As of December 31, 2024, the balance of the loan payable (net of debt issuance costs) was $6.4 million and a total of $10.0 million in borrowing capacity remained available at the option of Oxford. Our overall leverage and certain obligations and affirmative and negative covenants contained in the related documentation could adversely affect our financial health and business and future operations by limiting our ability to, among other things, satisfy our obligations under the Loan Agreement, refinance our debt on terms acceptable to us or at all, plan for and adjust to changing business, industry and market conditions, use our available cash flow to fund future acquisitions and make dividend payments, and obtain additional financing for working capital, to fund growth or for general corporate purposes, even when necessary to maintain adequate liquidity.

If we default under the Loan Agreement, Oxford may accelerate all of our repayment obligations and exercise all of their rights and remedies under the Loan Agreement and applicable law, potentially requiring us to renegotiate our agreement on terms less favorable to us. In addition, since the borrowings under the Loan Agreement are secured by a lien on our assets, including our intellectual property, Oxford would be able to foreclose on our assets if we do not cure any default or pay any amounts due and payable under the Loan Agreement. Further, if we are liquidated, the lenders’ right to repayment would be senior to the rights of the holders of our common stock to receive any proceeds from the liquidation. Oxford could declare a default upon the occurrence of an event of default, including events that they interpret as a material adverse change as defined in the Loan Agreement, payment defaults or breaches of certain affirmative and negative covenants, thereby requiring us to repay the loan immediately. Any declaration by Oxford of an event of default could significantly harm our business and prospects and could

cause the price of our common stock to decline. Additionally, if we raise any additional debt financing, the terms of such additional debt could further restrict our operating and financial flexibility.

Our limited operating history may make it difficult for you to evaluate the success of our business to date and to assess our future viability.

Our operations to date have been limited to organizing and staffing, business planning, raising capital, acquiring our technology, identifying potential product candidates, undertaking research and preclinical studies of our product candidates, manufacturing, and establishing licensing arrangements. We have not yet demonstrated the ability to complete clinical trials of our product candidates, obtain marketing approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful commercialization. Consequently, any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a longer operating history.

In addition, as a new business, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors. We will need to transition from a company with a licensing and research focus to a company that is also capable of supporting clinical development and commercial activities. We may not be successful in such a transition.

Risks Related to Our Business and Strategy

We expect to expand our development and regulatory capabilities, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations.

We expect to experience significant growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of product candidate development, growing our capability to conduct clinical trials, and, if approved, through commercialization of our product candidates. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel, or contract with third parties to provide these capabilities. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our business plans or disrupt our operations.

We must attract and retain highly skilled employees to succeed.

To succeed, we must recruit, retain, manage and motivate qualified clinical, scientific, technical and management personnel, and we face significant competition for experienced personnel. If we do not succeed in attracting and retaining qualified personnel, particularly at the management level, it could adversely affect our ability to execute our business plan, harm our results of operations and increase our capabilities to successfully commercialize our product candidates. In particular, we believe that our future success is highly dependent upon the contributions of our senior management, particularly our Chief Executive Officer and President, Stephen Brady and our Chief Medical Officer, Sam Whiting. The loss of services of Messrs. Brady or Whiting, or any of our other senior management, could delay or prevent the successful development of our product pipeline, completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of our product candidates, if approved. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology field is intense and as a result, we may be unable to continue to attract and retain qualified personnel necessary for the development of our business or to recruit suitable replacement personnel.

Many of the other biotechnology companies that we compete against for qualified personnel have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history in the industry than we do. They also may provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high-quality candidates than what we have to offer. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can discover and develop product candidates and our business will be limited.

Future acquisitions or strategic alliances could disrupt our business and harm our financial condition and results of operations.

We may acquire additional businesses or drugs form strategic alliances or create joint ventures with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our existing business. If we acquire businesses with promising markets or technologies, we may not be able to realize the benefit of acquiring such businesses if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture. We may encounter numerous difficulties in developing, manufacturing and marketing any new drugs resulting from a strategic alliance or acquisition that delay or prevent us from realizing their expected benefits or enhancing our business. We cannot assure you that, following any such acquisition, we will achieve the expected synergies to justify the transaction. The risks we face in connection with acquisitions, include:

•

diversion of management time and focus from operating our business to addressing acquisition integration challenges;

•

coordination of research and development efforts;

•

retention of key employees from the acquired company;

•

changes in relationships with strategic partners as a result of product acquisitions or strategic positioning resulting from the acquisition;

•

cultural challenges associated with integrating employees from the acquired company into our organization;

•

the need to implement or improve controls, procedures and policies at a business that prior to the acquisition may have lacked sufficiently effective controls, procedures and policies;

•

liability for activities of the acquired company before the acquisition, including intellectual property infringement claims, violation of laws, commercial disputes, tax liabilities and other known liabilities;

•

unanticipated write-offs or charges; and

•

litigation or other claims in connection with the acquired company, including claims from terminated employees, customers, former stockholders or other third parties.

Our failure to address these risks or other problems encountered in connection with our past or future acquisitions or strategic alliances could cause us to fail to realize the anticipated benefits of these transactions, cause us to incur unanticipated liabilities and harm the business generally. There is also a risk that future acquisitions will result in the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses or incremental operating expenses, any of which could harm our financial condition or results of operations.

Our ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and tax credit carryforwards may be subject to limitations.

Our ability to use our federal and state net operating losses (“NOLs”) to offset potential future taxable income and related income taxes that would otherwise be due is dependent upon our generation of future taxable income, and we cannot predict with certainty when, or whether, we will generate sufficient taxable income to use all of our NOLs.

Under Section 382 and Section 383 of the Code and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” its ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. A Section 382 “ownership change” is generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a three-year period. We may have experienced ownership changes in the past, including as a result of the merger with Millendo, and may experience

ownership changes in the future due to subsequent shifts in our stock ownership (some of which are outside of our control). Furthermore, the merger constituted an ownership change (within the meaning of Section 382 of the Code) of Millendo which may have eliminated or otherwise substantially limited our ability to use Millendo’s federal and state NOLs to offset our future taxable income. Consequently, even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to utilize a material portion of Tempest Tx, Inc. (our predecessor), Millendo’s or our combined NOL carryforwards and other tax attributes, which could have a material adverse effect on cash flow and results of operations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our ability to use of accumulated state tax attributes. There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities.

Risks Related to Our Product Development and Regulatory Approval

If we are unable to develop, obtain regulatory approval for and commercialize TPST-1495, amezalpat, or any of our future product candidates, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

We plan to invest a substantial amount of our efforts and financial resources in our current lead product candidates, TPST-1495, a dual EP2/EP4 prostaglandin (“PGE2”) receptor antagonist, and amezalpat, a peroxisome proliferator-activated receptor alpha (“PPARα”) antagonist for the treatment of various cancers. We have initiated Phase 1 clinical trials of TPST-1495 and amezalpat for the treatment of advanced solid tumors. We received positive feedback from the FDA on our potential pivotal Phase 3 trial design for amezalpat for HCC during the third quarter of 2024. Any delay in our ability to proceed to a pivotal trial for amezalpat will add time and expense to the development pathway and adversely impact the timing and potential for profitability. Our ability to generate product revenue will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual commercialization of TPST-1495 and amezalpat and any future product candidates, which may never occur. We currently generate no revenue from sales of any product and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a marketable product.

Each of our programs and product candidates will require further clinical and/or preclinical development, regulatory approval in multiple jurisdictions, obtaining preclinical, clinical and commercial manufacturing supply, capacity and expertise, building of a commercial organization, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenue from product sales. TPST-1495 and amezalpat and any future product candidates must be authorized for marketing by the FDA, the Health Products and Food Branch of Health Canada (“HPFB”), the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”), and certain other foreign regulatory agencies before we may commercialize any of our product candidates in the United States, Canada, European Union, or other jurisdictions.

The success of TPST-1495 and amezalpat and any future product candidates depends on multiple factors, including:

•

successful completion of preclinical studies, including those compliant with Good Laboratory Practice (“GLP”), or GLP toxicology studies, biodistribution studies and minimum effective dose studies in animals, and successful enrollment and completion of clinical trials compliant with current Good Clinical Practices (“GCPs”);

•

effective Investigational New Drug applications or other regulatory applications, that allow commencement of our planned clinical trials or future clinical trials for our product candidates in relevant territories;

•

establishing and maintaining relationships with contract research organizations (“CROs”) and clinical sites for the clinical development of our product candidates, both in the United States and internationally;

•

maintenance of arrangements with third-party contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”) for key materials used in our manufacturing processes and to establish backup sources for clinical and large-scale commercial supply;

•

positive results from our clinical programs that are supportive of safety and efficacy and provide an acceptable risk-benefit profile for our product candidates in the intended patient populations;

•

receipt of regulatory approvals from applicable regulatory authorities, including those necessary for pricing and reimbursement of our product candidates;

•

establishment and maintenance of patent and trade secret protection and regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates;

•

commercial launch of our product candidates, if and when approved, whether alone or in collaboration with others;

•

acceptance of our product candidates, if and when approved, by patients, patient advocacy groups, third-party payors and the general medical community;

•

our ability to effectively compete with developers of other therapies available in the market;

•

establishment and maintenance of adequate reimbursement from third-party payors for our product candidates;

•

our ability to acquire or in-license additional product candidates;

•

prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and defense of intellectual property rights and claims;

•

maintenance of a continued acceptable safety profile of our product candidates following approval, including meeting any post-marketing commitments or requirements imposed by or agreed to with applicable regulatory authorities;

•

political factors surrounding the approval process, such as government shutdowns; or

•

business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism such as the Russia-Ukraine war and the war in Israel, natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires, and public health crises.

If we do not succeed in one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations.

Clinical development is expensive and can take many years to complete, and our outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Success in preclinical studies and early clinical trials may not be predictive of results in later-stage clinical trials, and successful results from early or small clinical trials may not be replicated or show as favorable an outcome in later-stage or larger clinical trials, even if successful. We will be required to demonstrate through adequate and well-controlled clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses before we can seek regulatory approvals for their commercial sale. The conduct of Phase 3 trials and the submission of a New Drug Application (“NDA”) is a complicated process. We have not previously completed any pivotal clinical trials, have limited experience in preparing, submitting and supporting regulatory filings, and have not previously submitted an NDA. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials and other requirements in a way that leads to NDA submission and approval of any product candidate we are developing.

Even if our clinical trials demonstrate acceptable safety and efficacy of TPST-1495 and amezalpat or any future product candidates and such product candidates receive regulatory approval, the labeling we obtain through negotiations with the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities may not include data on secondary endpoints and may not provide us with a competitive advantage over other products approved for the same or similar indications.

Many companies in the biotechnology industry have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development, and there is a high failure rate for product candidates proceeding through clinical trials. In addition, different methodologies, assumptions and applications we utilize to assess particular safety or efficacy parameters may yield different statistical results. Even if we believe the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, these data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities. Preclinical and clinical data can be interpreted in different ways. Accordingly, the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities could interpret these data in different ways from us or our partners, which could delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. If our study data does not consistently or sufficiently demonstrate the safety or efficacy of any of our product candidates, including TPST-1495 and amezalpat, to the satisfaction of the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, then the regulatory approvals for such product candidates could be significantly delayed as we work to meet approval requirements, or, if we are not able to meet these requirements, such approvals could be withheld or withdrawn.

TPST US Equity

TPST · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

TPST US Equity☆

TPST · 10-K · period ended 2024-12-31

ITEM 1. BUSINESS

ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

TPST US Equity