Item 1A. Risk Factors

The following information sets forth risk factors that could cause our actual results to differ materially from those contained in forward-looking statements we have made in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and those we may make from time to time. You should carefully consider the risks described below, in addition to the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our other public filings. Our business, financial condition or results of operations could be harmed by any of these risks. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks not presently known to us or other factors not perceived by us to present significant risks to our business at this time also may impair our business operations.

Risks Related to our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital

We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will incur substantial losses for the foreseeable future and may never achieve or maintain profitability.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history. Our efforts are focused primarily on the treatment of unmet needs in immune-mediated diseases, in particular the development of budoprutug. We are initially developing budoprutug in primary membranous nephropathy (pMN), immune thrombocytopenia (ITP) and systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). In addition, on January 8, 2025, we expanded our pipeline of B-cell targeted therapeutics to address immune-mediated diseases by entering into a technology transfer and exclusive license agreement (the Mabworks Agreement) with Beijing Mabworks Biotech Co., Ltd. (Mabworks), pursuant to which Mabworks granted us licenses to develop, manufacture and commercialize CLYM116, an anti-APRIL (A PRoliferation-Inducing Ligand) monoclonal antibody, and products containing CLYM116.

To date, we have not received regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates or generated any revenue from the sale of products, and we do not expect to generate any revenue for the foreseeable future. Budoprutug and CLYM116 are both in early stages of research and development. As a result, we are not profitable, and we have incurred significant operating losses since inception. Our net losses were $73.9 million and $35.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. We had an accumulated deficit of $229.9 million and $156.0 million as of December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively. We expect to continue to incur substantial expenses and operating losses for the foreseeable future as we continue to develop our product candidates. As a result, we expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future as we:

We may be required to make significant payments to Mabworks in connection with the Mabworks Agreement.

Pursuant to the Mabworks Agreement, we acquired (1) an exclusive (even as to Mabworks and its affiliates), sublicensable right and license under certain patent rights and related know-how (the Licensed Intellectual Property) to develop, manufacture and commercialize Mabworks’ proprietary antibodies associated with CLYM116 and products containing CLYM116 (Licensed Products) outside of mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau, and Taiwan, which we collectively refer to as Greater China, (2) a non-exclusive, sublicensable right and license under the Licensed Intellectual Property to manufacture CLYM116 and Licensed Products in Greater China (the Licensed Territory) and (3) a non-exclusive, sublicensable right and license under the Licensed Intellectual Property to develop CLYM116 and Licensed Products in Greater China in connection with certain global clinical studies.

Under the Mabworks Agreement, we are subject to significant potential future obligations, including payment of development and regulatory milestones and royalties on net product sales, as well as other obligations. The Mabworks Agreement sets forth specific development, regulatory and commercial events and the related payments that we would be obligated to make to Mabworks, if and when such events occur. For additional information on the terms of the Mabworks Agreement, please refer to Part 1, Item 1 of this Annual Report on Form 10-K under the section titled “License Agreements”.

These potential obligations represent significant cash amounts that we may ultimately be obligated to pay. We cannot guarantee that we will have sufficient funds available to meet these obligations if and when these payments become due. The obligation to pay some or all of these milestone and royalty amounts may materially harm our development efforts, as well as our overall financial condition.

If we are unable to access capital when needed, it could force us to delay, reduce or terminate our product development programs, commercialization efforts, or other operations.

We had cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities of $212.5 million and $106.8 million at December 31, 2024 and 2023, respectively.

Based upon our current operating plan and assumptions, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our operations through 2027. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available capital resources sooner than we expect. In addition, we will need additional capital to advance and expand our research pipeline, conduct preclinical studies and clinical trials, proceed to develop and commercialize any approved products, and explore other pipeline opportunities. Our estimates of the sufficiency of our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities are based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we expect. Further, changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned.

Conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, pursuing regulatory approvals, establishing outsourced manufacturing relationships and successfully manufacturing and commercializing our product candidates is, and will be, very time-consuming, expensive and an uncertain process that takes years to complete. Our future need for additional funding depends on many factors, including:

We cannot be certain that additional funding will be available on acceptable terms, or at all. Our ability to raise additional capital may be adversely impacted by disruptions to, or continuing volatility in, the credit and financial markets in the United States (U.S.) and worldwide, including increased volatility in the trading prices for shares of public companies in the biopharmaceutical sector, actual and perceived changes in interest rates and inflation, macroeconomic uncertainties, or otherwise. We have no committed source of additional capital, and if we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of our product candidates or other research and development initiatives.

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

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial revenues from product sales, we may need or may seek to finance our operations through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances and marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations, even if we believe that we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of common stock, convertible securities or other equity securities, your ownership interest may be diluted, and the terms of these securities could include liquidation or other preferences and anti-dilution protections that could adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder. In addition, debt financing, if available, may result in fixed payment obligations and may involve agreements that include restrictive covenants that limit our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, creating liens, redeeming stock or declaring dividends, that could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business. Further, securing financing could require a substantial amount of time and attention from our management and may divert a disproportionate amount of their attention away from day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our management’s ability to oversee the development of our product candidates.

Additional capital may not be available to us, or even if it is, the cost of such capital may be high. We may be forced to obtain additional capital before reaching clinical or regulatory milestones, when our stock price or trading volume or both are low, or when the general market for life sciences companies is weak. Raising capital under any of these or similar scenarios, if we can raise any at all, may lead to significant dilution to our existing stockholders.

Further, we have issued, and may in the future issue additional, equity securities as consideration for business development transactions, which may also dilute our existing stockholders’ ownership interests. For example, we issued additional shares of our common stock in connection with our acquisition of Tenet Medicines, Inc. (the Acquisition), as well as in the concurrent private placement of shares of our common stock to certain institutional investors.

If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market our product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves.

We currently have no source of product revenue and may never become profitable.

We have never commercialized a product or generated any revenues from commercial product sales, or otherwise, and we may never become profitable. Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete.

We may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain marketing approval for our product candidates or generate revenue from the sale of any products for which we may obtain marketing approval.

Our ability to generate revenue from product sales or achieve profitability will depend upon our ability, alone or with any future collaborators, to successfully commercialize our product candidates or any products that we may develop, in-license or acquire in the future. Even if we are able to successfully achieve regulatory approval for our product candidates, we do not know when our product candidates will generate revenue from product sales for us, if at all. Our ability to generate revenue also depends on a number of additional factors, including our or any future collaborators’ ability to:

In addition, because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with pharmaceutical product development, our product candidates may not advance through development or achieve the endpoints of applicable clinical trials. We are unable to predict the timing or amount of increased expenses, or when or if we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability. In addition, our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we decide, or are required by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities, to perform studies or trials in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if we can complete the development and regulatory process for our product candidates, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any such products.

Even if we can generate revenues from the sale of any of our product candidates that may be approved, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations. If we fail to become profitable or are unable to sustain profitability on a continuing basis, then we may be unable to continue our operations at planned levels and be forced to reduce our operations.

Risks Related to our Business and the Development of our Product Candidates

Our future success is dependent primarily on the regulatory approval and commercialization of our product candidates.

We do not have any product candidates that have gained regulatory approval, and we are substantially dependent on the success of budoprutug and CLYM116. As a result, our prospects, including our ability to finance our operations and generate revenue, are substantially dependent on our ability to obtain regulatory approval for budoprutug and CLYM116, and, if approved, to successfully commercialize budoprutug and CLYM116. We cannot commercialize our product candidates or any product candidates we may develop in the U.S. without first obtaining regulatory approval for the product from the FDA; similarly, we cannot commercialize our product candidates or any product candidates we may develop outside of the U.S. without obtaining regulatory approval from comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, the FDA’s standard review process for a BLA is meant to take 10 months from the date a BLA is accepted for filing, but that process may take longer to complete and FDA approval is never guaranteed.

Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates for a target indication, we must demonstrate with substantial evidence gathered in preclinical and well-controlled clinical trials, generally including at least two well-controlled Phase 3 trials, and, with respect to approval in the U.S., to the satisfaction of the FDA, that the product candidate is potent, safe and pure for use for that target indication and that the manufacturing facilities, processes and controls are adequate. If our product candidates encounter undesirable safety signals, insufficient efficacy results, development delays, regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business would be significantly harmed.

Further, under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA), a BLA or supplement to a BLA for certain biological products must contain data to assess the safety, potency and purity of the biological product in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the product is safe, potent and pure, unless the sponsor receives a deferral or waiver from the FDA. A deferral may be granted for several reasons, including a finding that the product or therapeutic candidate is ready for approval for use in adults before pediatric trials are complete or that additional safety, potency and purity data need to be collected before the pediatric trials begin. The law requires the FDA to send a PREA Non-Compliance letter to sponsors who have failed to submit their pediatric assessments required under PREA, have failed to seek or obtain a deferral or deferral extension or have failed to request approval for a required pediatric formulation. It further requires the FDA to publicly post the PREA Non-Compliance letter and sponsor’s response.

The applicable legislation in the European Union (EU) also requires sponsors to either conduct clinical trials in a pediatric population in accordance with a Pediatric Investigation Plan approved by the Pediatric Committee of the European Medicines Agency (EMA) or to obtain a waiver or deferral from the conduct of these studies by this Committee. For any product candidates for which we seek regulatory approval in the U.S. or the EU, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain a waiver or alternatively complete any required studies and other requirements in a timely manner, or at all, which could result in associated reputational harm and subject us to enforcement action.

For any of our product candidates for which we seek regulatory approval in the U.S. or the EU, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to obtain a waiver or alternatively complete any required studies and other requirements in a timely manner, or at all, which could result in an issuance and publication of a PREA Non-Compliance letter and associated reputational harm, our product candidate being considered misbranded and subject to relevant enforcement action, invalidation of the marketing application, and/or financial penalties.

Moreover, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of one or more of our product candidates.

Obtaining regulatory approval for marketing of our product candidates in one country does not ensure we will be able to obtain regulatory approval in other countries, but a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory process in other countries.

Even if our product candidates were to successfully obtain approval from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, any approval might contain significant limitations related to use restrictions for specified age groups, gender or subpopulation of target indication, warnings, precautions or contraindications, or may be subject to burdensome post-approval study or risk management requirements. If we are unable to obtain regulatory approval for one or more jurisdictions, or any approval contains significant limitations, we may not be able to obtain sufficient funding or generate sufficient revenue to continue the development of budoprutug, CLYM116 or any product candidate that we may discover, in-license, develop or acquire. Also, any regulatory approval of our product candidates, once obtained, may be withdrawn. Furthermore, even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, such product’s commercial success will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

Many of these factors are beyond our control. If we, or our potential commercialization collaborators, are unable to successfully commercialize our product candidates, we may not be able to earn sufficient revenues to continue our business.

Even if our product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may still face future development and regulatory difficulties.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, it would be subject to ongoing requirements by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities governing the manufacture, quality control, further development, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, safety surveillance, import, export, advertising, promotion, recordkeeping and reporting of safety and other post-market information. The safety profile of any product will continue to be closely monitored by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities after approval. If the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities become aware of new safety information after approval of such product candidate, they may require labeling changes or establishment of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS) or similar strategy, impose significant restrictions on a product’s indicated uses or marketing, or impose ongoing requirements for potentially costly post-approval studies or post-market surveillance.

In addition, manufacturers of drug products and their facilities are subject to continual review and periodic inspections by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for compliance with current good manufacturing practice (cGMP) requirements and other regulations.

If we or a regulatory agency discover previously unknown problems with a product, such as adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or problems with the facility where the product is manufactured, a regulatory agency may impose restrictions on that product, the manufacturing facility or us, including requiring recall or withdrawal of the product from the market or suspension of manufacturing. If we, our product candidates or the manufacturing facilities for such product candidates, fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements, a regulatory agency may:

The occurrence of any event or penalty described above may inhibit our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and generate revenue. The FDA strictly regulates the advertising and promotion of drug products, and drug products may only be marketed or promoted for their FDA approved uses, consistent with the product’s approved labeling.

Advertising and promotion of any product candidate that obtains approval in the U.S. will be heavily scrutinized by the FDA, the Department of Justice, the Office of Inspector General of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) state attorneys general, members of Congress and the public. Violations, including promotion of any products for unapproved or off-label uses, are subject to enforcement letters, inquiries and investigations, and civil, criminal and/or administrative sanctions by the FDA and other enforcement authorities. Additionally, advertising and promotion of any product candidate that obtains approval outside of the U.S. will be heavily scrutinized by relevant foreign regulatory authorities.

In the U.S., engaging in impermissible promotion products for off-label uses can also subject us to false claims litigation under federal and state statutes, which can lead to numerous actions, including civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties and fines and agreements that materially restrict the manner in which we promote or distribute our drug products. These false claims statutes include the federal False Claims Act, which allows the federal government, or any individual relator or whistleblower on behalf of the federal government to bring a lawsuit against a pharmaceutical company alleging submission of false or fraudulent claims, or causing to present such false or fraudulent claims, for payment by a federal program such as Medicare or Medicaid. If the government prevails in the lawsuit, the individual relator may share in any fines or settlement funds. Since 2004, these False Claims Act lawsuits against pharmaceutical companies have increased significantly in volume and breadth, leading to several substantial civil and criminal settlements based on certain sales practices promoting off-label drug uses. This growth in litigation has increased the risk that a pharmaceutical company will have to defend a false claim action, pay settlement fines or restitution, agree to comply with burdensome reporting and compliance obligations, and be excluded from the Medicare, Medicaid and other federal and state healthcare programs. If we do not lawfully promote our products once they have received regulatory approval, we may become subject to such litigation and, if we are not successful in defending against such actions, those actions could have a material adverse effect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and future prospects.

In certain circumstances, the FDA and other regulatory authorities allow companies to engage in truthful, non-misleading, and non-promotional scientific communications concerning their products. For example, in October 2023, the FDA published draft guidance outlining the agency’s non-binding policies governing the distribution of scientific information on unapproved uses to healthcare providers. This draft guidance calls for such communications to be truthful, non-misleading, factual, and unbiased and include all information necessary for healthcare providers to interpret the strengths and weaknesses and validity and utility of the information about the unapproved use. In addition, under guidance from the FDA and the Pre-Approval Information Exchange Act, signed into law as part of the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, companies may also promote information that is consistent with the prescribing information and proactively speak to formulary committee members of payors regarding data for an unapproved drug or unapproved uses of an approved drug. We may engage in these discussions and communicate with healthcare providers, payors and other constituencies in compliance with all applicable laws, regulatory guidance and industry best practices. We will need to carefully navigate the FDA’s various regulations, guidance and policies, along with recently enacted legislation, to ensure compliance with restrictions governing promotion of our product candidates.

Existing government regulations may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and/or be subject to fines or enhanced government oversight and reporting obligations, which would adversely affect our business, prospects and ability to achieve or sustain profitability.

In addition, we could be adversely affected by several significant administrative law cases decided by the U.S. Supreme Court in 2024. In Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, for example, the U.S. Supreme Court overruled Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc., which for 40 years required federal courts to defer to permissible agency interpretations of statutes that are silent or ambiguous on a particular topic.

The U.S. Supreme Court stripped federal agencies of this presumptive deference and held that courts must exercise their independent judgment when deciding whether an agency such as the FDA acted within its statutory authority under the Administrative Procedure Act (APA). Additionally, in Corner Post, Inc. v. Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, the U.S. Supreme Court held that actions to challenge a federal regulation under the APA can be initiated within six years of the date of injury to the plaintiff, rather than the date the rule is finalized.

The decision appears to give prospective plaintiffs a personal statute of limitations to challenge longstanding agency regulations. Another decision, Securities and Exchange Commission v. Jarkesy, overturned regulatory agencies’ ability to impose civil penalties in administrative proceedings. These decisions could introduce additional uncertainty into the regulatory process and may result in additional legal challenges to actions taken by federal regulatory agencies, including the FDA and the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS).

In addition to potential changes to regulations as a result of legal challenges, these decisions may result in increased regulatory uncertainty and delays and other impacts, any of which could adversely impact our business and operations.

Our ability to develop and market new product candidates may also be impacted by litigation challenging the FDA’s approval of another company’s drug product. In April 2023, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Texas invalidated the approval by the FDA of mifepristone, a drug product which was originally approved in 2000 and whose distribution is governed by various measures adopted under a REMS. The Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit declined to order the removal of mifepristone from the market but did hold that plaintiffs were likely to prevail in their claim that changes allowing for expanded access of mifepristone, which the FDA authorized in 2016 and 2021, were arbitrary and capricious. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court reversed that decision after unanimously finding that the plaintiffs (anti-abortion doctors and organizations) did not have standing to bring this legal action against the FDA. On October 11, 2024, the Attorneys General of three states filed an amended complaint in the district court in Texas challenging the FDA’s actions. Depending on the outcome of this litigation, our ability to develop new product candidates and to maintain approval of any product candidates, if and when approved, could be delayed, undermined or subject to protracted litigation.

Finally, with the change in presidential administrations in 2025, there is substantial uncertainty as to how, if at all, the new administration will seek to modify or revise the requirements and policies of the FDA and other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over our product candidates. The impending uncertainty could present new challenges or potential opportunities as we navigate the clinical development and approval process for our product candidates.

Preliminary, initial, or interim results from clinical trials that we announce, present, or publish from time to time may change as more data and information become available (or are updated based upon audit, validation and verification procedures of the data/information commonly performed for clinical trials) that could result in material changes in the final trial results.

From time to time, we may announce, present or publish preliminary, initial, or interim data or other information from our clinical trials, such as the preliminary data from the Phase 1b clinical trial of budoprutug for the treatment of pMN. Any such data and other results from our clinical trials may materially change as more patient data and information become available. Such data and information may also undergo significant change following subsequent auditing, validation and/or verification procedures that are commonly conducted in clinical trials. Thus, any preliminary, initial, or interim data or other information may not be predictive of final results from the clinical trial and should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. We may also arrive at different conclusions, or other determinations that may qualify such results, once we have received and fully evaluated the additional data. Differences between preliminary, initial or interim results and final results could lead to significantly different interpretations or conclusions of the trial outcomes. Further, others, including regulatory authorities and collaboration or regional partners, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of our product candidates, the approvability or commercialization of our product candidates, and our business, in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and investors may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to publicly disclose.

If the preliminary, initial or interim data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize our product candidates may be harmed, which could significantly harm our reputation, business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Preclinical and clinical development involves a lengthy, complex and expensive process with an uncertain outcome. The outcome of preclinical testing and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials, and the results of our clinical trials may not satisfy the requirements of the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities.

To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that such product candidates are potent, safe and pure in humans to the satisfaction of the FDA. Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain.

In particular, in the U.S., the general approach for FDA approval of a new drug is dispositive data from two well-controlled, Phase 3 clinical trials of the relevant drug in the relevant patient population. Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve hundreds to thousands of patients, have significant costs and take years to complete. A product candidate can fail at any stage of testing, even after observing promising signs of activity in earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials, as demonstrated by the failure of our legacy program, ETX-810, which failed to achieve statistically significant separation from placebo on the primary endpoint in either of our Phase 2a clinical trials in diabetic peripheral neuropathic pain or lumbosacral radicular pain. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. Initial success in clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when such trials are completed. There is typically an extremely high rate of attrition from the failure of product candidates proceeding through clinical trials. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy profile despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials.

A number of companies in the biotechnology industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or emergence of unacceptable safety issues, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved and there can be no assurance that any of our future clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further preclinical or clinical development of our product candidates. Our success is heavily dependent on the progress and outcomes of our late phase clinical development of budoprutug for pMN, our planned Phase 2 clinical trial of budoprutug for ITP, our planned Phase 1b clinical trial of budoprutug for SLE, and our preclinical studies of CLYM116. In addition, the commencement and rate of completion of preclinical studies and clinical trials may be delayed by many factors, including:

Any inability to successfully initiate or complete preclinical studies or clinical trials could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue from product sales. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may seriously harm our business.

In addition, changes in marketing approval policies during the development period, changes in or the enactment or promulgation of additional statutes, regulations or guidance or changes in regulatory review for each submitted product application, may cause delays in the approval or rejection of an application. For example, in December 2022, with the passage of the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act (FDORA) Congress required sponsors to develop and submit a diversity action plan (DAP) for each Phase 3 clinical trial or any other “pivotal study” of a new drug or biological product. These plans are meant to encourage the enrollment of more diverse patient populations in late-stage clinical trials of FDA-regulated products. In June 2024, as mandated by FDORA, the FDA issued draft guidance outlining the general requirements for DAPs. Unlike most guidance documents issued by the FDA, the DAP guidance when finalized will have the force of law because FDORA specifically dictates that the form and manner for submission of DAPs are specified in FDA guidance.

Further, in January 2022, the new Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 became effective in the EU and replaced the prior Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC. This regulation aims at simplifying and streamlining the authorization, conduct and transparency of clinical trials in the EU. Under the coordinated procedure for the approval of clinical trials, the sponsor of a clinical trial to be conducted in more than one EU Member State will only be required to submit a single application for approval. The submission will be made through the Clinical Trials Information System, a clinical trials portal overseen by the EMA and available to clinical trial sponsors, competent authorities of the EU Member States and the public.

Further, clinical trials that we may undertake in the future will likely contain endpoints that require subjective assessments and subject us to a substantial risk of “placebo effect”. While a product candidate may show clinical activity or therapeutic benefit, a high placebo effect in a clinical trial will make it difficult to ascertain that benefit or to show a statistically significant effect of the product candidate as compared to the control arm and may ultimately cause a clinical trial to fail. Moreover, principal investigators for our future clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. The FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected the interpretation of the study. The FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority, as applicable, and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of our product candidates.

Delays in the completion of any preclinical studies or clinical trials of our product candidates will increase our costs, slow down our product candidate development and approval process and delay or potentially jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate product revenue.

In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates. Any delays to our preclinical studies or clinical trials that occur as a result could shorten any period during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize such product candidate, enable our competitors to bring products to market before we do, and significantly reduce the commercial viability of such product candidate. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

If we seek to conduct clinical trials in foreign countries or pursue marketing approvals in foreign jurisdictions, we must comply with numerous foreign regulatory requirements governing, among other things, the conduct of clinical trials, manufacturing and marketing authorization, pricing and third-party reimbursement. The foreign regulatory approval process varies among countries and jurisdictions and may include all of the risks associated with FDA approval described above and risks attributable to the satisfaction of local regulations in foreign jurisdictions. Moreover, the time required to obtain approval may differ jurisdiction-to-jurisdiction from that required to obtain FDA approval. Approval by foreign regulatory authorities does not ensure approval by the FDA and, similarly, approval by the FDA does not ensure approval by regulatory authorities outside the U.S. Successful completion of clinical trials is a prerequisite to submitting a marketing application to foreign regulatory authorities or the FDA, for each product candidate and, consequently, the ultimate approval and commercial marketing of any product candidate.

We may experience negative or inconclusive results, or regulators may be unwilling to accept preclinical or clinical data obtained in foreign jurisdictions, which may result in our deciding, or our being required by regulators, to conduct additional clinical studies or trials or abandon some or all of our product development programs, which could harm our business.

In addition, the FDA and other regulatory authorities’ policies with respect to clinical trials may change and additional government regulations may be enacted. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies governing clinical trials, our development plans may be impacted, and our product development costs may increase if we experience delays in testing or marketing approvals. In addition, if we make manufacturing or other changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional studies to bridge such new formulations to earlier versions. We do not know whether any of our clinical trials will begin as planned, will need to be restructured or will be completed on schedule, or at all. We may also decide to change the design or protocol of one or more of our clinical trials, which could result in delays. Significant clinical trial delays with respect to our product candidates could also shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates or allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do and impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates.

Our product candidates may cause adverse events and/or undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit the commercial profile of an approved label, or result in significant negative consequences following any marketing approval.

Certain adverse events and undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or pause clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. If undesirable side effects do occur in our future clinical trials they could cause delay or even discontinuance of further development of our product candidates, which would impair our ability to generate revenues and would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and prospects.

As a result of undesirable side effects or further safety issues that we may experience in our clinical trials in the future, we may not receive approval to market our product candidates, which could prevent us from ever generating revenues or achieving profitability. Results of our trials could reveal an unacceptably high severity and prevalence of side effects.

In such an event, our trials could be suspended or terminated and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease further development of, or deny approval of, our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. The drug-related side effects could affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled subjects to complete the trial or result in potential product liability claims. Any of these occurrences may have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and prospects.

Additionally, if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, and we, or others, later identify undesirable side effects caused by such product, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved.

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

We may not be able to initiate or continue our planned clinical trials on a timely basis or at all if we are unable to recruit and enroll a sufficient number of eligible patients to participate in these trials through completion of such trials as required by the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Patient enrollment is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials. Our ability to enroll eligible patients may be limited or may result in slower enrollment than we anticipate. There may be limited patient pools from which to draw for clinical studies. The eligibility criteria of our clinical studies will further limit the pool of available study participants as we will require that patients have specific characteristics that we can measure or to assure their disease is either severe enough or not too advanced to include them in a study. Patient enrollment for our clinical trials may be affected by other factors, including:

In addition, our clinical trials may compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition would reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials in such clinical trial site.

Our inability to enroll enough patients for our clinical trials would result in significant delays or might require us to abandon one or more clinical trials. Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs, affect the timing or outcome of the planned clinical trials, product candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to seek and obtain the regulatory approval required to commence product sales and generate revenue, which could prevent completion of these trials, adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates, cause the value of our company to decline and limit our ability to obtain additional financing if needed. Furthermore, even if we can enroll enough patients for our clinical trials, we may have difficulty maintaining participation in our clinical trials through the treatment and any follow-up periods.

We are also required to register certain clinical trials and post the results of completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, such as www.ClinicalTrials.gov in the U.S., within certain time frames. Failure to do so can result in fines, adverse publicity and civil and criminal sanctions.

We could be subject to product liability lawsuits based on the use of our product candidates in clinical testing or, if obtained, following any such product’s marketing approval and commercialization. Product liability lawsuits brought against us or any of our future collaborators could divert our resources and attention, require us to cease clinical testing, cause us to incur substantial liabilities or limit commercialization of our product candidates.

We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of biotechnology products. Currently, we have no products that have been approved for commercial sale; however, the use of our product candidates by us and any collaborators in clinical trials may expose us to liability claims. We will face an even greater risk if a product candidate is approved by regulatory authorities and introduced commercially. Product liability claims may be brought against us or our partners if any product candidate we develop allegedly causes injury or is found to be otherwise unsuitable for human use during product testing, manufacturing, marketing or sale. Any such product liability claim may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, a failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability and a breach of warranties.

Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. Such claims could be made by participants enrolled in our clinical trials, patients, health care providers, biotechnology companies, our collaborators or others using, administering or selling any of our future approved products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against any such claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit commercialization of our product candidates, if approved. Even successful defense would require significant financial and management resources.

Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, product liability claims may result in:

Although the clinical trial process is designed to identify and assess potential side effects, clinical development does not always fully characterize the safety and efficacy profile of a new medicine, and it is always possible that a drug, even after regulatory approval, may exhibit unforeseen side effects. If any of our product candidates were to cause adverse side effects during clinical trials or after approval, we may be exposed to substantial liabilities. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use such product candidate. If any of our product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we will be highly dependent upon consumer perceptions of us and the safety and quality of such product. We could be adversely affected if we are subject to negative publicity associated with illness or other adverse effects resulting from physicians’ or patients’ use or misuse of any approved products or any similar products distributed by other companies.

Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage, including clinical trial liability, this insurance may not fully cover potential liabilities that we may incur. The cost of any product liability litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. We will need to increase our insurance coverage if we commercialize any product that receives regulatory approval. In addition, insurance coverage is becoming increasingly expensive. If we are unable to maintain sufficient insurance coverage at an acceptable cost or to otherwise protect against potential product liability claims, it could prevent or inhibit the development and commercial production and sale of our product candidates, which could harm our business.

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological change, and there is a possibility that our competitors may achieve regulatory approval before us or develop therapies that are safer, less expensive or more advanced or effective than us, which may harm our financial condition and our ability to successfully market or commercialize our product candidates.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. Moreover, the immunology and inflammation field is characterized by rapidly changing technologies, significant competition, and a strong emphasis on intellectual property. We will face competition with respect to our product candidates from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, and biotechnology companies worldwide. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies, and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection, and establish collaborative arrangements for development, manufacturing, and commercialization.

There are a number of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of products for the treatment of the disease indications for which we are developing budoprutug or CLYM116. Some of these competitive products and therapies are based on scientific approaches that are the same as or similar to our approach, and others are based on entirely different approaches.

The competitive landscape for budoprutug includes multiple companies developing biologics and other modalities targeting CD19 for immune-mediated diseases. We are aware of several companies developing naked monoclonal antibodies, including Amgen, which has an approved treatment, UPLIZNA (inebilizumab), for neuromyelitis optica spectrum disorder and IASO Biotherapeutics (RD129). Companies developing bispecific T-cell engagers or CD19 bifunctional monoclonal antibodies include but are not limited to, Cullinan Therapeutics (CLN-978), Zenas BioPharma (obexelimab), Roche (RG6382) and Merck (CN201). Companies developing CD19 chimeric antigen receptor T-cell (CART-T) therapies include but are not limited to Cabaletta Bio, Kyverna Therapeutics and Nkarta.

The competitive landscape for CLYM116 includes but is not limited to companies developing biologics targeting APRIL or BAFF/APRIL, such as Otsuku (sibeprenlimab), Novartis (zigakibart), Jade Biosciences (JADE-001), Vertex Pharmaceuticals (povetacicept) and Vera Therapeutics (atacicept), and companies developing degraders for immunoglobulin A nephropathy (IgAN) such as Biohaven (BHV-1400).

Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, may have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals, and marketing approved products. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and gene therapy industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management consultants and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs.

Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize product candidates that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, or are less expensive than budoprutug or CLYM116, or that would render budoprutug or CLYM116 obsolete or non-competitive. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other regulatory approval for their product candidates more rapidly than we may obtain approval for budoprutug and CLYM116, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Additionally, technologies developed by our competitors may render budoprutug or CLYM116 uneconomical or obsolete, and we may not be successful in marketing budoprutug or CLYM116 against competitors.

In addition, as a result of the expiration or successful challenge of our patent rights, we could face more litigation with respect to the validity and/or scope of patents relating to our competitors’ products. The availability of our competitors’ products could limit the demand, and the price we are able to charge, for budoprutug or CLYM116.

If we successfully obtain approval for budoprutug or CLYM116, we believe that the key competitive factors that will affect the success of these candidates will be efficacy, safety, tolerability, convenience, price and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors relative to such competing products. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors have products that are superior in one or more of these categories.

Drug development is highly uncertain, and if we are unable to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business may be harmed.

Drug development is a highly uncertain undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. For example, previously we paused or discontinued the development of all of our legacy product candidates for the treatment of neuronal excitability disorders, including ETX-155 and ETX-123, which were still in drug discovery stages, and we may not ever obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In addition, as a company, we have no prior experience developing biological product candidates. As such, we may encounter delays or difficulties in our efforts to develop and commercialize budoprutug and CLYM116.

To date, we have not initiated or completed a pivotal clinical trial, obtained marketing approval for any product candidate, manufactured a commercial scale product or arranged for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conducted the sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our short operating history as a company makes any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty.

We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by early-stage biotechnology companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficulties successfully, our business may be harmed.

Our estimates of market opportunity and forecasts of market growth for our product candidates may prove to be inaccurate, and even if the markets in which we compete achieve the forecasted growth, our business may not grow at similar rates, or at all.

Our market opportunity estimates and growth forecasts are subject to significant uncertainty and are based on assumptions and estimates which may not prove to be accurate. We currently focus our research and product development on budoprutug for the treatment of pMN, ITP, and SLE and on CLYM116 for the treatment of IgAN. Our understanding of the patient populations with these diseases is based on estimates in published literature.

These estimates, and our estimates and forecasts relating to size and expected growth based on these estimates, may prove to be incorrect and new studies may reduce the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases.

The number of patients in the U.S. and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with budoprutug and/or CLYM116, or patients may become increasingly difficult to identify and access. Even if the patient populations meet our size estimates and growth forecasts, our business may not grow at similar rates, or at all. Our growth is subject to many factors, including our success in implementing our business strategy, which is subject to many risks and uncertainties.

Our revenue will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the markets in the territories for which we gain regulatory approval, the accepted price for our product candidates, the ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement, the ability to gain market share and whether we own the commercial rights for that territory.

If the number of addressable patients is not as significant as we estimate, the indication approved by regulatory authorities is narrower than we expect or the treatment population is narrowed by competition, physician choice or treatment guidelines, we may not generate significant revenue from sales of our product candidates, even if approved.

Further, there are several factors that could contribute to making the actual number of patients who receive our product candidates less than the potentially addressable market. These include the lack of widespread availability of, and limited reimbursement for, new therapies in many underdeveloped markets.

We have no experience in sales, marketing and distribution and may have to enter into agreements with third parties to perform these functions, which could prevent us from successfully commercializing our product candidates.

We currently have no sales, marketing or distribution capabilities. To commercialize our product candidates, we must either develop our own sales, marketing and distribution capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services for us. If we decide to market or distribute our product candidates on our own, we will have to commit significant resources to developing a marketing and sales force and supporting distribution capabilities. If we decide to enter into arrangements with third parties for performance of these services, we may find that they are not available on terms acceptable to us, or at all. If we are not able to establish and maintain successful arrangements with third parties or build our own sales and marketing infrastructure, we may not be able to commercialize our product candidates, which would adversely affect our business, results of operations, financial condition and cash flows and prospects.

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

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

In addition, disruptions may result from events similar to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the COVID-19 pandemic, a number of companies announced receipt of complete response letters due to the FDA’s inability to complete required inspections for their applications.

In the event of a similar public health emergency in the future, the FDA may not be able to continue at its current pace and review timelines could be extended. Regulatory authorities outside the U.S. facing similar circumstances may adopt similar restrictions or other policy measures in response to a similar public health emergency and may also experience delays in their regulatory activities.

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital to properly capitalize and continue our operations.

Risks Related to Legal and Regulatory Compliance

Enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval and commercialize our product candidates, if and when approved, and may affect the prices we may charge for such product candidates, if and when approved.

The U.S. and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product for which we obtain marketing approval.

In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, the Affordable Care Act (ACA) was enacted, which includes measures that have significantly changed the way health care is financed by both governmental and private insurers. There have been executive, judicial and congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Further, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (IRA) 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 through a newly established manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how any additional challenges or future healthcare reform measures will impact the ACA.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. For example, in August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 was signed into law, which, among other things, included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of, on average, 2% per fiscal year, effective April 1, 2013, which, due to subsequent legislative amendments including the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023, will stay in effect until 2032 unless Congress takes additional action.

Recently, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the U.S. with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. presidential executive orders, congressional inquiries and legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs.

On July 9, 2021, President Biden signed Executive Order 14063, which focuses on, among other things, the price of pharmaceuticals. The order directs HHS to create a plan within 45 days to combat “excessive pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals and enhance domestic pharmaceutical supply chains, to reduce the prices paid by the federal government for such pharmaceuticals, and to address the recurrent problem of price gouging.” On September 9, 2021, HHS released its plan to reduce pharmaceutical prices. The key features of that plan are to: (a) make pharmaceutical prices more affordable and equitable for all consumers and throughout the health care system by supporting pharmaceutical price negotiations with manufacturers; (b) improve and promote competition throughout the prescription pharmaceutical industry by supporting market changes that strengthen supply chains, promote biosimilars and generic drugs, and increase transparency; and (c) foster scientific innovation to promote better healthcare and improve health by supporting public and private research and making sure that market incentives promote discovery of valuable and accessible new treatments.

More recently, on August 16, 2022, the IRA was signed into law by President Biden. The new legislation has implications for Medicare Part D, which is a program available to individuals who are entitled to Medicare Part A or enrolled in Medicare Part B to give them the option of paying a monthly premium for outpatient prescription drug coverage. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years.

Specifically, with respect to price negotiations, Congress authorized Medicare to negotiate lower prices for certain costly single-source drug and biologic products that do not have competing generics or biosimilars and are reimbursed under Medicare Part B and Part D. CMS may negotiate prices for ten high-cost drugs paid for by Medicare Part D starting in 2026, followed by 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs in 2027, 15 additional Medicare Part B or Part D drugs in 2028, and 20 additional Medicare Part B or Part D drugs per year in 2029 and beyond.

This provision applies to drug products that have been approved for at least nine years and biologics that have been licensed for 13 years, but it does not apply to drugs and biologics that have been approved for a single rare disease or condition. Nonetheless, since CMS may establish a maximum price for these products in price negotiations, we would be fully at risk of government action if any of our product candidates are the subject of Medicare price negotiations. Given this risk, these provisions of the IRA may also further heighten the risk that we would not be able to achieve the expected return on any product candidate, if approved, or the full value of our patents protecting any such approved drug products if prices are set after any such approved products have been on the market for nine years.

The first cycle of negotiations for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program commenced in the summer of 2023.

On August 15, 2024, the HHS published the results of the first Medicare drug price negotiations for ten selected drugs that treat a range of conditions, including diabetes, chronic kidney disease and rheumatoid arthritis. The prices of these ten drugs will become effective on January 1, 2026. On January 17, 2025, CMS announced its selection of 15 additional drugs covered by Part D for the second cycle of negotiations by February 1, 2025. While there had been some questions about the current administration’s position on this program, CMS issued a public statement on January 29, 2025, declaring that lowering the cost of prescription drugs is a top priority of the new administration and CMS is committed to considering opportunities to bring greater transparency in the negotiating program. This second cycle of negotiations with participating drug companies will occur during 2025, and any negotiated price for this second set of drugs will be effective starting January 1, 2027.

Further, the legislation subjects drug manufacturers to civil monetary penalties and a potential excise tax for failing to comply with the legislation by offering a price that is not equal to or less than the negotiated “maximum fair price” under the law or for taking price increases that exceed inflation. In addition to the drug price negotiation program, the IRA established inflation rebate programs under Medicare Part B and Part D. These programs require manufacturers to pay rebates to Medicare if they raise their prices for certain Part B and Part D drugs faster than the rate of inflation. On December 9, 2024, with issuance of its 2025 Physician Fee Schedule final regulation, CMS finalized its rules governing the IRA inflation rebate programs. The new law also caps Medicare out-of-pocket drug costs at an estimated $4,000 a year in 2024 and, thereafter beginning in 2025, at $2,000 a year.

In addition, the IRA potentially raises legal risks with respect to individuals participating in a Medicare Part D prescription drug plan who may experience a gap in coverage if they required coverage above their initial annual coverage limit before they reached the higher threshold, or “catastrophic period” of the plan. Individuals requiring services exceeding the initial annual coverage limit and below the catastrophic period, must pay 100% of the cost of their prescriptions until they reach the catastrophic period.

Among other things, the IRA contains many provisions aimed at reducing this financial burden on individuals by reducing the co-insurance and co-payment costs, expanding eligibility for lower income subsidy plans, and price caps on annual out-of-pocket expenses, each of which could have potential pricing and reporting implications. Accordingly, while it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated, we cannot predict with certainty what impact any federal or state health reforms will have on us, but such changes could impose new or more stringent regulatory requirements on our activities or result in reduced reimbursement for our product candidates, if and when approved, or any products we may develop, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

On June 6, 2023, Merck & Co. filed a lawsuit against the HHS and CMS asserting that, among other things, the IRA’s Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program constitutes an uncompensated taking in violation of the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution. Subsequently, a number of other parties, including the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, Bristol Myers Squibb Company, the PhRMA, Astellas Pharma US, Inc., Novo Nordisk Inc., Janssen Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novartis Pharmaceutical Corporation, AstraZeneca L.P. and Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, Inc., also filed lawsuits in various courts with similar constitutional claims against the HHS and CMS. HHS has generally won the substantive disputes in these cases, and various federal district court judges have expressed skepticism regarding the merits of the legal arguments being pursued by the pharmaceutical industry. Certain of these cases are now on appeal.

We expect that litigation involving these and other provisions of the IRA will continue, with unpredictable and uncertain results. Accordingly, while it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated, we cannot predict with certainty what impact any federal or state health reforms will have on us, but such changes could impose new or more stringent regulatory requirements on our activities or result in reduced reimbursement for our product candidates, if and when approved, and any other products we may develop, any of which could adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

At the state level, individual states are increasingly aggressive in 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. In addition, regional healthcare organizations and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs.

These measures could reduce the ultimate demand for our product candidates, if and when approved, and any other products we may develop, or put pressure on our product pricing.

We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

In the EU, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our product candidates, if and when approved, and any other products we may develop. In markets outside of the U.S. and the EU, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies. In many countries, including those of the EU, the pricing of prescription pharmaceuticals is subject to governmental control and access. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after the receipt of marketing approval for a product.

To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval in some countries, we or our collaborators may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our product to other available therapies. If reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount or if pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels, our business could be materially harmed.

We expect that the healthcare reform measures that have been adopted and may be adopted in the future may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product and could seriously harm our future revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products.

Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, health care professionals, consultants, third-party payors and customers will be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws and other healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties.

Healthcare providers and others play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Although we do not currently have any products on the market, our operations may be, directly or indirectly through our prescribers, customers and third-party payors, subject to various U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations.

These laws may impact, among other things, our current business operations, including our clinical research activities and proposed sales, marketing and education programs and constrain the business of financial arrangements and relationships with healthcare providers and other parties through which we may market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. In addition, we may be subject to additional healthcare, statutory and regulatory requirements and enforcement by foreign regulatory authorities in jurisdictions in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from U.S. government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, disgorgement, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the delay, reduction, termination or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming, and may require significant financial and personnel resources.

Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired.

If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment. If any of the above occur, it could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

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

We process personal data and other sensitive data (including health data we collect about study or trial participants in connection with our preclinical studies or clinical trials); proprietary and confidential business data; trade secrets; intellectual property; and sensitive third-party data.

Our data processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contracts, and other obligations that govern the processing of personal data by us and on our behalf.

In the U.S., federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, and consumer protection laws. These privacy laws include, without limitation, the following laws and regulations: Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act (HITECH) (which imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information for covered entities and their business associates), and the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA). The CCPA applies to personal information of consumers, business representatives, and employees, and requires businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of California residents to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for civil penalties of up to $7,500 per violation and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Although the CCPA exempts some data processed in the context of clinical trials, the CCPA increases compliance costs and potential liability with respect to other personal data we maintain about California residents. In addition, the California Privacy Rights Act (CPRA) amended the CCPA and expanded the CCPA’s requirements, including by adding a new right for individuals to correct their personal information and establishing a new regulatory agency to implement and enforce the law.

In addition to California, at least 18 other states have passed comprehensive privacy laws similar to the CCPA and CPRA. These laws are either in effect or will go into effect sometime before the end of 2026. Like the CCPA and CPRA, these laws create obligations related to the processing of personal information, as well as special obligations for the processing of “sensitive” data (which includes health data in some cases). Some of the provisions of these laws may apply to our business activities.

Other states will be considering similar laws in the future, and Congress has also been debating passing a federal privacy law. There are also states that are specifically regulating consumer health information that may affect our business. For example, Washington state passed a health privacy law in 2023 that regulates the collection and sharing of health information, and the law also has a private right of action, which further increases the relevant compliance risk. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data, and additional states are considering such legislation. These laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products.

Plaintiffs’ lawyers are also increasingly using privacy-related statutes at both the state and federal level to bring lawsuits against companies for their data-related practices. In particular, there have been a significant number of cases filed against companies for their use of pixels and other web trackers. These cases often allege violations of the California Invasion of Privacy Act and other state laws regulating wiretapping, as well as the federal Video Privacy Protection Act. The rise in these types of lawsuits creates potential risk for our business.

Outside the U.S., an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards apply to data privacy and security. For example, the EU’s General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) and the equivalent law in the United Kingdom (U.K. GDPR) and, together with EU GDPR, the GDPR, impose strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals, including sensitive data that we may process such as health data.

For example, under the GDPR, companies may face temporary or definitive bans on data processing and other corrective actions, as well as fines of up to 20 million euros under the EU GDPR, 17.5 million pounds sterling under the U.K. GDPR, or, in each case, 4% of annual global revenue, whichever is greater. Further, individuals may initiate litigation related to our processing of their personal data. Additionally, under various privacy laws and other obligations, we may be required to obtain certain consents to process personal data. Our inability or failure to do so could result in adverse consequences.

In the ordinary course of business, we may transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the U.S. or other countries. The European Economic Area (EEA), the United Kingdom (U.K.) and certain jurisdictions have enacted data localization laws and cross-border personal data transfer laws. In particular, the EEA and the U.K. have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the U.S. and other countries whose privacy laws it believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and U.K. to the U.S. in compliance with law, such as the EEA standard contractual clauses, the U.K. International Data Transfer Agreement and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (which allows for transfers for relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the U.S.

If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the U.K. or other jurisdictions to the U.S., or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and U.K. to other jurisdictions, particularly to the U.S., are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers out of Europe for allegedly violating the EU GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations.

We are also bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security, and our efforts to comply with such obligations may not be successful. For example, certain privacy laws, such as the GDPR and the CCPA, require our customers to impose specific contractual restrictions on their service providers. We publish privacy policies, marketing materials and other statements, such as compliance with certain certifications or self-regulatory principles, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators or other adverse consequences. Our obligations related to data privacy and security are quickly changing in an increasingly stringent fashion, creating some uncertainty as to the effective future legal framework. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or in conflict among jurisdictions. Preparation for and compliance with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources. These obligations may necessitate changes to our information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. Although we try to comply with all applicable data privacy and security obligations, we may at times fail (or be perceived as having failed). Despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties upon whom we rely may fail to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations and compliance posture. Moreover, clinical trial subjects about whom we or our potential collaborators obtain information, as well as the third-party providers (such as research institutions) who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information.

If we or the third parties on which we rely fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with data privacy and security obligations, we could face significant consequences.

These consequences may include, but are not limited to, government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-related claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans on processing personal data; and orders to destroy or not use personal data. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including our clinical trials); inability to process personal data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or revision or restructuring of our operations.

We may seek certain designations for our product candidates, including Breakthrough Therapy, Fast Track and Priority Review designations in the U.S., and PRIME Designation in the EU, but we might not receive such designations, and even if we do, such designations may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

We may seek certain designations for our product candidates that could expedite review and approval by the FDA. A Breakthrough Therapy product is defined as a product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other products, to treat a serious condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For products that have been designated as Breakthrough Therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens.

The FDA may also designate a product for Fast Track review if it is intended, whether alone or in combination with one or more other products, for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and it demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such a disease or condition. For Fast Track review products, sponsors may have greater interactions with the FDA and the FDA may initiate review of sections of a Fast Track product’s application before the application is complete. This rolling review may be available if the FDA determines, after preliminary evaluation of clinical data submitted by the sponsor, that a Fast Track review product may be effective.

We may also seek a priority review designation for our product candidates. If the FDA determines that a product candidate offers major advances in treatment or provides a treatment where no adequate therapy exists, the FDA may designate the product candidate for priority review. A priority review designation means that the goal is for the FDA to review an application for marketing approval in six months, rather than the standard review period of 10 months.

These designations are within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe that our product candidates meet the criteria for these designations, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation.

Further, even if we receive a designation, the receipt of such designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development or regulatory review or approval process compared to product candidates considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if our product candidates qualify for these designations, the FDA may later decide that such product candidate no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened.

In the EU, we may seek PRIME designation for our product candidates. The PRIME program focuses on product candidates that target conditions for which there exists no satisfactory method of treatment in the EU, or even if such a method exists, the product candidate may offer a major therapeutic advantage over existing treatments. To be accepted for PRIME designation, a product candidate must meet the eligibility criteria in respect of its major public health interest and therapeutic innovation based on information that is capable of substantiating the claims. The benefits of a PRIME designation include the appointment of a rapporteur of the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use to provide continued support and help to build knowledge ahead of a marketing authorization application, early dialogue and scientific advice at key development milestones, and the potential to qualify products for accelerated review, meaning reduction in the review time for an opinion on approvability to be issued earlier in the application process. PRIME designation enables an applicant to request parallel EMA scientific advice and health technology assessment advice to facilitate timely market access. Even if we receive PRIME designation for our product candidates, the designation may not result in a materially faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional EMA procedures. Further, obtaining PRIME designation does not assure or increase the likelihood of EMA’s grant of a marketing authorization.

Accelerated approval by the FDA, even if granted for our product candidates, may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may seek approval of our product candidates using the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. A product may be eligible for accelerated approval if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition, generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies, and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA or other applicable regulatory agency makes the determination regarding whether a surrogate endpoint is reasonably likely to predict long-term clinical benefit.

Prior to seeking such accelerated approval, we will seek feedback from the FDA and otherwise evaluate our ability to seek and receive such accelerated approval.

As a condition of approval, the FDA requires that a sponsor of a product receiving accelerated approval perform an adequate and well-controlled post-marketing confirmatory clinical trial or trials. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence and we may be required to evaluate different or additional endpoints in these post-marketing confirmatory trials. These confirmatory trials may require enrollment of more patients than we currently anticipate and will result in additional costs, which may be greater than the estimated costs we currently anticipate. In addition, the FDA currently requires as a condition for accelerated approval preapproval of promotional materials, which could adversely impact the timing of the commercial launch of the product.

There can be no assurance that the FDA will agree with any proposed surrogate endpoints or that we will decide to pursue or submit a BLA for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval for our product candidates.

Similarly, there can be no assurance that, after feedback from FDA, we will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we decide to submit an application for accelerated approval or under another expedited regulatory designation, there can be no assurance that such submission or application will be accepted or that any expedited review or approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all.

The FDA may withdraw approval of a product candidate approved under the accelerated approval pathway if, for example, the trial required to verify the predicted clinical benefit of our product candidate fails to verify such benefit or does not demonstrate sufficient clinical benefit to justify the risks associated with the drug. The FDA may also withdraw approval if other evidence demonstrates that our product candidate is not shown to be safe or effective under the conditions of use, we fail to conduct any required post approval trial of our product candidate with due diligence or we disseminate false or misleading promotional materials relating to our product candidate.

A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval for our product candidates, or withdrawal of a product candidate, would result in a longer time period for commercialization of such product candidate, could increase the cost of development of such product candidate and could harm our competitive position in the marketplace.

There can be no assurance that we will satisfy all FDA requirements, including new provisions, that govern accelerated approval. For example, with passage of the FDORA in December 2022, Congress modified certain provisions governing accelerated approval of drug and biologic products. Specifically, the new legislation authorized the FDA to require a sponsor to have its confirmatory clinical trial underway before accelerated approval is awarded and to submit progress reports on its post-approval studies to the FDA every six months until the study is completed. Moreover, FDORA established expedited procedures authorizing the FDA to withdraw an accelerated approval if certain conditions are met, including where a required confirmatory study fails to verify and describe the predicted clinical benefit or where evidence demonstrates the product is not shown to be safe or effective under the conditions of use. The FDA may also use such procedures to withdraw an accelerated approval if a sponsor fails to conduct any required post-approval study of the product with due diligence, including with respect to “conditions specified by the Secretary.” The new procedures include the provision of due notice and an explanation for a proposed withdrawal, and opportunities for a meeting with the Commissioner of the FDA or the Commissioner’s designee and a written appeal, among other things. We will need to fully comply with these and other requirements in connection with the development and approval of any product candidate that qualifies for accelerated approval. The FDA may also use such procedures to withdraw an accelerated approval if a sponsor fails to conduct any required post-approval study of the product with due diligence. The new procedures include the provision of due notice and an explanation for a proposed withdrawal, and opportunities for a meeting with the FDA and a written appeal, among other things. We will need to fully comply with these and other requirements in connection with the development and approval of any of our product candidates that qualify for accelerated approval.

More recently, in March 2023, the FDA issued draft guidance that outlines its current thinking and approach to accelerated approval. The FDA indicated that the accelerated approval pathway is commonly used for approval of oncology drugs due to the serious and life-threatening nature of cancer. Although single-arm trials have been commonly used to support accelerated approval, a randomized controlled trial is the preferred approach as it provides a more robust efficacy and safety assessment and allows for direct comparisons to an available therapy. To that end, the FDA outlined considerations for designing, conducting, and analyzing data for trials intended to support accelerated approvals of oncology therapeutics. Subsequently, in December 2024 and January 2025, the FDA issued additional draft guidances relating to accelerated approval. These guidances describe FDA’s latest thinking on what it means to conduct a confirmatory trial with due diligence and how the agency plans to interpret whether such a study needs to be underway at the time of approval.

While these guidances are currently only in draft form and will ultimately not be legally binding even when finalized, we will need to observe the FDA’s guidance closely if we seek accelerated approval for any of our product candidates. Accordingly, even if we do receive accelerated approval, we may not experience a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and receiving accelerated approval does not provide assurance of ultimate full FDA approval.

In the EU, a “conditional” marketing authorization may be granted in cases where all the required safety and efficacy data are not yet available. A conditional marketing authorization is subject to conditions to be fulfilled for generating missing data or ensuring increased safety measures. A conditional marketing authorization is valid for one year and has to be renewed annually until fulfillment of all relevant conditions.

Once the applicable pending studies are provided, a conditional marketing authorization can become a “standard” marketing authorization. However, if the conditions are not fulfilled within the timeframe set by the EMA, the marketing authorization will cease to be renewed.

We have received orphan drug designation for budoprutug for the treatment of pMN, but we may be unable to realize the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including market exclusivity.

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the U.S., or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the U.S. when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug or biologic in the U.S. will be recovered from sales in the U.S. for that drug or biologic. In order to obtain orphan drug designation, the request must be made before submitting a BLA.

In the U.S., orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages, and user-fee waivers. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic 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 drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval of that particular product for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a BLA, to market the same biologic (meaning, a product with the same principal molecular structural features) for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. As a result, even if budoprutug receives orphan exclusivity, the FDA can still approve other biologics that do not have the same principal molecular structural features for use in treating the same indication or disease or the same biologic for a different indication or disease during the exclusivity period. Furthermore, the FDA can waive orphan exclusivity if we are unable to manufacture a sufficient supply of budoprutug or if a subsequent sponsor demonstrates clinical superiority over budoprutug.

The FDA granted orphan drug designation to budoprutug for the treatment of pMN. We may seek orphan drug designation for budoprutug in other specific orphan indications in which there is a medically plausible basis for the use of budoprutug or for CLYM116 for the treatment of IgAN but may never receive such designations. In addition, even with orphan drug designation, exclusive marketing rights in the U.S. may be limited if we seek approval for an indication broader than the orphan designated indication and may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if we are unable to assure sufficient quantities of our product candidates to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition, or if a subsequent sponsor demonstrates clinical superiority over our product candidates, if approved.

The FDA and Congress may further reevaluate the Orphan Drug Act and its regulations and policies. This may be particularly true in light of a decision from the Court of Appeals for the 11th Circuit in September 2021 finding that, for the purpose of determining the scope of exclusivity, the term “same disease or condition” means the designated “rare disease or condition” and could not be interpreted by the FDA to mean the “indication or use.” Although there have been legislative proposals to overrule this decision, they have not been enacted into law. On January 23, 2023, the FDA announced that, in matters beyond the scope of that court order, the FDA will continue to apply its existing regulations tying orphan-drug exclusivity to the uses or indications for which the orphan drug was approved. More recently however, on February 14, 2025, a federal district court in Washington, DC fully embraced the reasoning of the 11th Circuit decision in another decision challenging the scope of orphan drug exclusivity. The implications of this decision, and its impact on the FDA’s implementation of the Orphan Drug Act, are unclear at this point.

We do not know if, when, or how the FDA may change the orphan drug regulations and policies in the future or whether Congress will take legislative action, and it is uncertain how any changes might affect our business. Depending on what changes the FDA or Congress may make to orphan drug regulations and policies, our business could be adversely impacted.

If approved, our product candidates regulated as biologics may face competition from biosimilars approved through an abbreviated regulatory pathway.

The ACA includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (BPCIA) which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biologic products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-licensed reference biologic product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed.

During this 12-year period of regulatory exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a BLA for the competing product containing the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity, and potency of the other company’s product.

In December 2022, Congress clarified through the FDORA, that the FDA may approve multiple first interchangeable biosimilar biological products so long as the products are all approved on the same first day on which such a product is approved as interchangeable with the reference product and the exclusivity period may be shared amongst multiple first interchangeable products. More recently, in October 2023, the FDA issued its first interchangeable exclusivity determination under the BPCIA.

We believe that any of our product candidates, if approved as a biologic product under a BLA, should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. Nonetheless, the approval of biosimilar products referencing our product candidates would have a material adverse impact on our business due to increased competition and pricing pressures. Moreover, there is a risk that any exclusivity we do receive could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider our products to be reference products for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for generic competition sooner than anticipated. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation.

The extent to which a biosimilar, once licensed, will be substituted for any of our product candidates in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biologic products is not yet clear, and will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. If competitors are able to obtain regulatory approval for biosimilars referencing any of our product candidates, such product may become subject to competition from such biosimilars, with the attendant competitive pressure and consequences. The ultimate impact, implementation, and meaning of the BPCIA are subject to uncertainty, and any new regulations, guidance, policies or processes adopted by the FDA to implement the law could have a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for our product candidates.

In addition, foreign regulatory authorities may change their approval policies and new regulations may be enacted relating to non-patent exclusivity. For instance, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently undergoing a complete review process, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. The European Commission’s proposal for revision of several legislative instruments related to medicinal products, which may reduce the duration of regulatory data protection and exclusivity periods for orphan drugs, and revise the eligibility for expedited pathways in addition to other changes, was published on April 26, 2023. On April 10, 2024, the European Parliament adopted a position on the proposal requesting several amendments to the package. The proposed revisions remain to be agreed and adopted by the European Parliament and European Council and the proposals may therefore be substantially revised before adoption, which is not anticipated before early 2026. The revisions may, however, have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry and our business in the long term.

We plan to conduct clinical trials at sites outside the U.S. The FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations, and the conduct of trials outside the U.S. could subject us to additional delays and expense.

We plan to conduct one or more clinical trials with one or more trial sites that are located outside the U.S. The acceptance by the FDA or other regulatory authorities of trial data from clinical trials conducted outside their jurisdiction may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all.

In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means.

In addition, even where the foreign trial data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the trial is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the trial through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the U.S. or the applicable jurisdiction.

If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in our product candidates not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction. Conducting clinical trials outside the U.S. will also expose us to additional risks, including risks associated with:

Our failure to obtain regulatory approval in foreign jurisdictions would prevent us from marketing our product candidates outside the U.S.

If we succeed in developing our product candidates, we intend to market them in foreign jurisdictions in addition to the U.S. In order to market and sell products in other jurisdictions, we must obtain separate marketing approvals and comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements. The approval procedure varies among countries and can involve additional testing.

The time required to obtain approval may differ substantially from that required to obtain FDA approval. The regulatory approval process outside the U.S. generally includes all of the risks associated with obtaining FDA approval. In addition, in many countries outside the U.S., we must secure product pricing and reimbursement approvals before regulatory authorities will approve the product for sale in that country. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our product candidates in certain countries.

Further, clinical trials conducted in one country may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other countries and regulatory approval in one country does not ensure approval in any other country, while a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one country may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. If we fail to obtain approval of any of our product candidates by regulatory authorities in another country, we will be unable to commercialize any such product in that country, and the commercial prospects of that product candidate and our business prospects could decline. In addition, failure to obtain regulatory approval in one country or region could adversely affect future regulatory approvals in other countries.

Further, in many countries outside the U.S., a product candidate must also be approved for reimbursement before it can be sold in that country. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products, if approved, is also subject to approval. Obtaining non-U.S. regulatory approvals and compliance with non-U.S. regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of any of our product candidates.

In addition, if we fail to obtain the non-U.S. approvals required to market any of our product candidates outside the U.S. or if we fail to comply with applicable non-U.S. regulatory requirements, our target markets will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of such product candidate will be harmed and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected.

Additionally, we could face heightened risks with respect to obtaining marketing authorization in the U.K. as a result of the withdrawal of the U.K. from the EU, commonly referred to as Brexit. The U.K. is no longer part of the European Single Market and EU Customs Union. As of January 1, 2021, the U.K. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) became responsible for supervising medicines and medical devices in Great Britain, comprising England, Scotland and Wales under domestic law, whereas under the terms of the Northern Ireland Protocol, Northern Ireland is currently subject to EU rules.

The U.K. and the EU have, however, agreed to the Windsor Framework, which fundamentally changes the existing system under the Northern Ireland Protocol, including with respect to the regulation of medicinal products in the U.K. As of January 1, 2025, the changes introduced by the Windsor Framework will see the MHRA be responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the U.K. market (i.e., Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and the EMA will no longer have any role in approving medicinal products destined for Northern Ireland. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, any marketing authorizations, as a result of Brexit or otherwise, may force us to restrict or delay efforts to seek regulatory approval in the U.K. for our product candidates, which could harm our business.

Risks Related to our Dependence on Third Parties

We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct, supervise, and monitor our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not properly and successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval of or commercialize our product candidates.

We expect to rely on third-party CROs to conduct, supervise, and monitor our future preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates, and we do not currently plan to independently conduct preclinical studies or future clinical trials of any other potential product candidates.

We expect to continue to rely on third parties, such as CROs, clinical data management organizations, medical institutions and clinical investigators to conduct our future preclinical studies and clinical trials. While we have agreements governing their activities, we have limited influence over their actual performance and control only certain aspects of their activities. The failure of these third parties to successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines could substantially harm our business because we may not obtain marketing approval for or commercialize our product candidates in a timely manner or at all.

Moreover, these agreements might terminate for various reasons, including a failure to perform by the third parties; if we need to enter into alternative arrangements, that will delay our product development activities and harm our business.

Our reliance on these third parties for development activities will reduce our control over these activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. For example, we will remain responsible for ensuring that each of our clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the general investigational plan and protocols for the trial and for ensuring that our preclinical studies are conducted in accordance with good laboratory practice (GLP) as appropriate.

Moreover, the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities require us to comply with GCPs for conducting, monitoring, recording, and reporting the results of clinical trials to assure that data and reported results are credible and accurate and that the rights, integrity, and confidentiality of trial participants are protected. As a clinical trial sponsor, we will also have regulatory requirements that directly apply to us. Regulatory authorities enforce these requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical investigators, and trial sites.

If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, we or our CROs may be subject to enforcement or other legal actions, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials.

In addition, if and when we have an approved product, we will be required to report certain financial interests of our third-party investigators if these relationships exceed certain financial thresholds or meet other criteria.

The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may question the integrity of the data from those clinical trials conducted by investigators who previously served or currently serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive cash compensation in connection with such services or otherwise receive compensation from us that could be deemed to impact study outcome, proprietary interests in a product candidate, certain company equity interests or significant payments of other sorts.

We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials complies with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product candidates that were produced under cGMP regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. We also are required to register certain clinical trials and post the results of certain completed clinical trials on a government-sponsored database, ClinicalTrials.gov, within specified time frames. Failure to do so can result in enforcement actions and adverse publicity.

Our CROs may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other drug development activities that could harm our competitive position. In addition, our CROs are not our employees, and except for remedies available to us under our agreements with such CROs, we cannot control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to any of our clinical, non-clinical, and preclinical programs.

If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, marketing approvals for our product candidates, and we will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize such product candidate, or we or they may be subject to regulatory enforcement actions. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for such product candidate would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed. To the extent we are unable to successfully identify and manage the performance of third-party service providers in the future, our business may be harmed.

If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or to do so on commercially reasonable terms.

Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays could occur, which could compromise our ability to meet our desired development timelines. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not harm our business.

We contract with third parties for the manufacture of materials and expect to continue to do so for our clinical trials and for commercialization of our product candidates. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of such materials or that such supply will not be available to us at an acceptable cost or timelines, which could delay, prevent, or impair its development or commercialization efforts.

We do not have any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely and expect to continue to rely on third-party manufacturers for the manufacture of our product candidates for nonclinical and clinical testing and for commercial supply, if approved.

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

Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers could delay any potential clinical development or marketing approval of our product candidates. We do not currently have arrangements in place for redundant supply for bulk drug substances.

If any one of our current contract manufacturers cannot perform as agreed, we may be required to replace that manufacturer, or we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we may not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with a different third-party manufacturer, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, if at all. In either scenario, our clinical trial supply could be delayed significantly as we establish alternative supply sources.

In some cases, the technical skills required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original third-party manufacturer and we may have difficulty, or there may be contractual restrictions prohibiting us from, transferring such skills to a back-up or alternate supplier, or we may be unable to transfer such skills at all. In addition, if we are required to change third-party manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new third-party manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations.

We will also need to verify, such as through a manufacturing comparability study, that any new manufacturing process will produce our product candidates according to the specifications previously submitted to the FDA or another regulatory authority. The delays associated with the verification of a new third-party manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop or commercialize our drug product candidates in a timely manner or within budget.

Furthermore, a third-party manufacturer may possess technology related to the manufacture of our product candidates that such third-party manufacturer owns independently. This would increase our reliance on such third-party manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such third-party manufacturer in order to have another third-party manufacturer our product candidates.

In addition, changes in manufacturers often involve changes in manufacturing procedures and processes, which could require that we conduct bridging studies between its prior clinical supply used in its clinical trials and that of any new manufacturer. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability of clinical supplies which could require the conduct of additional clinical trials.

Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates may adversely affect our future expenses and our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if we receive marketing approval, on a timely and competitive basis.

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

We and any contract manufacturers and suppliers we engage are subject to numerous federal, state, and local environmental, health, and safety laws, regulations, and permitting requirements, including those governing laboratory procedures; the generation, handling, use, storage, treatment, and disposal of hazardous and regulated materials and wastes; the emission and discharge of hazardous materials into the ground, air, and water; and workplace health and safety. Under certain environmental laws, we could be held responsible for costs relating to any contamination at third-party facilities. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our research and product development efforts.

We do not carry specific biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage, and our property, casualty, and general liability insurance policies specifically exclude coverage for damages and fines arising from biological or hazardous waste exposure or contamination.

Accordingly, in the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for damages or be penalized with fines in an amount exceeding our resources, and our clinical trials or regulatory approvals could be suspended, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects.

In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health, and safety laws, regulations, and permitting requirements. These current or future laws, regulations, and permitting requirements may impair our development, or production efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, regulations, and permitting requirements also may result in substantial fines, penalties, or other sanctions or business disruption, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects.

Any third-party contract manufacturers and suppliers we engage will also be subject to these and other environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations. Liabilities they incur pursuant to these laws and regulations could result in significant costs or an interruption in operations, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects.

We may not have access to the raw materials and other components necessary for the manufacturing of our product candidates.

We are dependent on third parties for the supply of various materials that are necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials and do not have any supply agreements currently in place. Even if we had supply agreements, it is possible that the supply may be reduced or interrupted at any time. In such case, we may not be able to find other suppliers of acceptable materials in appropriate quantities at an acceptable cost.

If we lose key suppliers or the supply of materials is diminished or discontinued, we may not be able to continue to develop, manufacture and market our product candidates in a timely and competitive manner. In addition, these materials are subject to stringent manufacturing processes and rigorous testing. Delays in the completion and validation of facilities and manufacturing processes of these materials could adversely affect our ability to complete trials and commercialize our products in a cost-effective and timely manner. If we encounter difficulties in the supply of these materials or other necessary products, or if we are not able to maintain our supply agreements or establish new supply agreements in the future or incur increased production costs as a result of any of the foregoing, our product development and business prospects could be significantly compromised.

If we are not able to establish future collaborations, we may have to alter some of our future development and commercialization plans.

Our product development programs and the potential commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional capital to fund expenses. We may decide to collaborate for the future development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. Furthermore, we may find that our programs require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, and the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use these proprietary rights. For example, in January 2025, we entered into the Mabworks Agreement, pursuant to which we obtained licenses to develop, manufacture and commercialize CLYM116, and products containing CLYM116, in certain territories.

We will likely have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development or commercialization of any product candidates we may seek to develop with them. We cannot predict the success of any collaboration that we have entered into or will enter into.

We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators, and many more established companies may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, financial resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors.

Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA, EMA, the MHRA, or similar foreign regulatory authorities, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge, and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. We may also be restricted under future license agreements from entering into agreements on certain terms with potential collaborators. Collaborations are complex and time consuming to negotiate and document.

In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators.

We may not be able to negotiate further collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license to intellectual property of interest, we may not be able to secure exclusive rights, in which case others could use the same rights and compete with us. Collaboration partners may not prioritize our product candidates or otherwise not effectively pursue the development of such product candidates which may delay, reduce or terminate the development of such product candidate, reduce or delay its development program or delay its potential commercialization. Further, if we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to delay, reduce or terminate the development of such product candidate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. Doing so will likely harm our ability to execute our business plans.

If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.

Changes in U.S. and international trade policies, particularly with respect to China, may adversely impact our business and operating results.

The U.S. government has made statements and taken certain actions that have led and may continue to lead to changes to U.S. and international trade policies, including imposing several rounds of tariffs and export control restrictions affecting certain products manufactured in China. It is unknown whether and to what extent new tariffs, export controls, or other new laws or regulations will be adopted, or the effect that any such actions would have on us or our industry.

In particular, some of our manufacturers and suppliers are located in China. Trade tensions and conflicts between the U.S. and China have been escalating in recent years and, as such, we are exposed to the possibility of product supply disruption and increased costs and expenses in the event of changes to the laws, rules, regulations and policies of the governments of the U.S. or China, or due to geopolitical unrest and unstable economic conditions. Certain Chinese biotechnology companies may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements or proposed legislation by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such entities, thereby potentially disrupting their supply of material to us.

For example, in February 2024, U.S. lawmakers called for investigations into and the imposition of possible economic sanctions against Chinese biotechnology companies WuXi AppTec and WuXi Biologics (together, Wuxi) over alleged ties to the Chinese military. In addition, the proposed BIOSECURE Act introduced in the House of Representatives, as well as a substantially similar bill in the Senate, targets certain Chinese biotechnology companies. We currently rely on certain foreign or foreign-owned third-party vendors, including WuXi and its affiliates, to manufacture certain materials used in preclinical trials of our product candidates or to provide services in connection with certain preclinical trials and discovery activities. In addition, we rely on Mabworks, a Chinese corporation, pursuant to the Mabworks Agreement, to conduct preclinical studies of CLYM116 and to provide clinical supply of CLYM116 for these studies.

If these bills become law, or similar laws are passed, they would have the potential to severely restrict the ability of companies to contract with certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise received funding from, the U.S. government. Such disruptions could have adverse effects on the development of our product candidates and our business operations.

Any unfavorable government policies on international trade, such as export controls, capital controls or tariffs, may increase the cost of manufacturing our product candidates and platform materials, affect the demand for our product candidates (if and once approved), the competitive position of our product candidates, and import or export of raw materials and finished product candidates used in our preclinical studies and clinical trials, particularly with respect to any product candidates and materials that we import from China. If any new tariffs, export controls, legislation and/or regulations are implemented, or if existing trade agreements are renegotiated or, in particular, if either the U.S. or Chinese government takes retaliatory trade actions due to the recent trade tension, such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

We rely heavily on certain in-licensed patents and other intellectual property rights in connection with our development of our product candidates and may be required to acquire or license additional patents or other intellectual property rights to continue to develop and commercialize our product candidates.

We rely heavily on patents, know-how and other intellectual property licensed from others. We are party to a license agreement with each of Cancer Research Technology Limited (CRH) and Mabworks under each of which we are granted rights to intellectual property that are important to budoprutug and CLYM116, respectively.

Additionally, we may need to acquire or license intellectual property rights from additional third parties in the future in order to continue to develop or commercialize our product candidates. Any future license agreements where we in-licenses intellectual property may impose on us various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones and/or royalties and other obligations.

If we fail to comply with any of the obligations under such license agreements, including payment terms and diligence terms, the licensors may have the right to terminate these agreements, in which case we may lose important intellectual property rights and we may not be able to develop, manufacture, market or sell our product candidates or may face other penalties under such agreements or be subject to litigation for breach of these agreements. In addition, such a termination could result in the licensor reacquiring the intellectual property rights and subsequently enabling a competitor to access the technology. Any such occurrence could materially adversely affect the value of any of our product candidates. Termination of license agreements or reduction or elimination of our rights under them may result in us having to negotiate a new or reinstated agreement, which may not be available on equally favorable terms, or at all, which may mean we are unable to develop or commercialize our product candidates. For instance, these licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use the subject intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology and our product candidates in the future, such as provisions under the license agreement with CRH prohibiting us from developing our product candidates for oncology indications, or provisions under the Mabworks Agreement prohibiting us from undertaking certain activities in Greater China. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology or the methods for manufacturing or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis.

Further, the agreements under which we currently license, and may license in the future, intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. Accordingly, material disputes may arise between us and our licensors, regarding intellectual property subject to such license agreement, including those relating to:

The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, or decrease the financial or other benefits it might otherwise receive under the relevant agreement. If material disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain licensing arrangements on acceptable terms or are insufficient to provide us the necessary rights to use the intellectual property, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates.

If we or any such licensors fail to adequately protect the relevant in-licensed intellectual property, our ability to commercialize our product candidates could suffer. Any material disputes with licensors or any termination of the licenses on which we depend would have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

We have nine pending U.S. provisional patent applications with respect to budoprutug. We can provide no assurance that any of our other current or future patent applications will result in issued patents for budoprutug or CLYM116. If we are unable to obtain, maintain and protect sufficient patent and other intellectual property rights for our product candidates and technology, or if the scope of patent and other intellectual property rights obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market.

Our success depends in significant part on our ability and the ability of our licensors, or future licensors, licensees or collaborators to obtain, maintain, enforce and defend patents and other intellectual property rights with respect to budoprutug or any product candidates we may develop and technology and to operate our business without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of others.

With respect to budoprutug, we own nine pending U.S. provisional patent applications, and we can provide no assurance that any of these current patent applications or future patent applications will result in issued patents or that any issued patents will provide us with any competitive advantage. Failure to obtain issued patents could have a material adverse effect on our ability to develop and commercialize budoprutug or any product candidates we may develop.

Furthermore, other parties may successfully challenge, invalidate or circumvent our issued patents so that our patent rights do not create an effective competitive barrier or revenue source.

A U.S. provisional patent application is not eligible to become an issued patent until, among other things, we file non-provisional patent application within 12 months of filing of the provisional patent application. With regard to such U.S. provisional patent applications, if we do not timely file any non-provisional patent applications, we may lose our priority dates with respect to our provisional patent applications and any patent protection on the inventions disclosed in our provisional patent applications. While we intend to timely file non-provisional patent applications relating to our provisional patent applications, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents that provide us with any competitive advantage. If our licensors are not fully cooperative or disagree with us as to the prosecution, maintenance or enforcement of any patent rights, such patent rights could be compromised.

If there are material defects in the form, preparation, prosecution, or enforcement of our or our licensors’ patents or patent applications, such patents may be invalid and/or unenforceable, and such applications may never result in valid, enforceable patents. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the U.S. and abroad.

We may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others, or other proceedings in the USPTO or applicable foreign offices that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability.

An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could result in loss of exclusivity or freedom to operate, patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, limit the scope or duration of the patent protection of budoprutug or any other product candidates, all of which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical product candidates or technology to compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize product candidates or approved products (if any) without infringing third-party patent rights. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize budoprutug or any other product candidates, or could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds necessary to continue our research programs or clinical trials. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us.

We cannot be certain that the USPTO and courts in the U.S. or the patent offices and courts in foreign countries will consider the claims in our patents and applications covering budoprutug and any other product candidates as patentable.

Method-of-use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method. This type of patent does not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method. Moreover, even if competitors do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications, physicians may prescribe these products off-label. Although off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method-of-use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent, including through legal action.

If we cannot obtain or lose patent protection for budoprutug or any other product candidates, it could have a material adverse impact on our business. Additionally, as a licensee, we rely on third parties to file and prosecute patent applications and maintain patents and otherwise protect the licensed intellectual property under some of our license agreements. For example, under the license agreement with CRH, CRH is responsible for prosecuting and maintaining intellectual property protection for budoprutug in consultation with us. We have not had and do not have primary control over these activities for certain of our in-licensed patents or patent applications and other intellectual property rights. For example, we cannot be certain that such activities by CRH or other licensors will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights.

We have limited control over the manner in which CRH or our other licensors may initiate an infringement proceeding against a third-party infringer of such intellectual property rights, or defend certain intellectual property that may be licensed to us. It is possible that CRH or our other licensors infringement proceeding or defense activities may be less vigorous than if we conduct them ourselves. We cannot be certain that such activities by third parties have been or will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents or other intellectual property rights.

For example, under the Mabworks Agreement, Mabworks is responsible for prosecuting and maintaining intellectual property protection for CLYM116 in Greater China in consultation with us. We have not had and do not have primary control over these activities in Greater China for CLYM116. We cannot be certain that such activities by Mabworks will be conducted in compliance with applicable laws and regulations or will result in valid and enforceable patents and other intellectual property rights in Greater China. Pursuant to the terms of the license agreements with some of our licensors, the licensors may have the right to control enforcement of our licensed patents or defense of any claims asserting the invalidity of these patents and even if we are permitted to pursue such enforcement or defense, we will require the cooperation of our licensors. We cannot be certain that our licensors will allocate sufficient resources or prioritize their or our enforcement of such patents or defense of such claims to protect its interests in the licensed patents. Even if we are not a party to these legal actions, an adverse outcome could harm our business because it might prevent us from continuing to license intellectual property that we may need to operate our business.

If any of our licensors or any of our future licensors or future collaborators fail to appropriately prosecute and maintain patent protection for patents covering our product candidates, our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products.

In addition, even where we have the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have acquired or licensed from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensors and their counsel that took place prior to our assuming control over patent prosecution. The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming. We and our licensors, and any future licensors, licensees or collaborators, may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner.

It is also possible that we or our licensors will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output in time to obtain patent protection or fail to file patent applications covering inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before a competitor or another third party files a patent application covering, or publishes information disclosing, a similar, independently-developed invention. Such competitor’s or other third party’s patent application may pose obstacles to our ability to obtain patent protection or limit the scope of the patent protection we may obtain.

Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, collaborators, CROs, CDMOs, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection. In addition, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the U.S. and other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we or our future licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our owned or any future licensed patents or pending patent applications, or were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions.

In addition, our technology acquired or licensed from various third parties, including our licensors, may be subject to retained rights. Our licensors often retain certain rights under their agreements with us, including the right to use the underlying technology for use in fields other than the fields licensed to us or for use in noncommercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology.

It is difficult to monitor whether our licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to its licensed technology in the event of misuse by the licensor.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and is the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our and our current or future licensors’ patent rights are uncertain.

Our and our future licensors’ pending, and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued that protect our technology or product candidates, in whole or in part, or which effectively exclude others from commercializing competitive technologies and product candidates. The patent examination process may require us or our future licensors to narrow the scope of the claims of our pending and future patent applications, and therefore, even if such patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage.

Our and our licensors’ patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover such technology. Any patents that we hold or license, or may in-license in the future may be challenged, narrowed, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. Consequently, we do not know whether budoprutug or any other product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner. Any of the foregoing could impair our competitive position and harm our business.

The patent protection we obtain for budoprutug or any other product candidates and technologies may be challenged and rendered invalid and/or unenforceable.

Even if our owned patent applications issue as patents, the issuance of any such patents is not conclusive as to their inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and such patents or patents we license from third parties, may be challenged, invalidated, narrowed or held to be unenforceable, including in the courts or patent offices in the U.S. and abroad, or circumvented.

We or our licensors may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the USPTO or equivalent foreign bodies, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, re-examination, post-grant and inter partes review or interference proceedings challenging our or our licensors’ patent rights or the patent rights of others.

An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our or our licensors’ patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, we may have to participate in interference or derivation proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority or ownership of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. Such proceedings and any other patent challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, loss of priority or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and product candidates. Such proceedings also may result in substantial costs and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Moreover, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other developments related to any of the foregoing proceedings. If securities analysts or investors perceive those results to be negative, it could cause the price of shares of our common stock to decline. Any of the foregoing could harm our business.

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

Because we will rely on third parties to develop and manufacture budoprutug, CLYM116, and any other product candidates, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them.

We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite these contractual agreements with third parties, sharing trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements.

Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure would impair our competitive position and may harm our business.

In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights.

Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets would impair our competitive position and harm our business.

We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents, the patents of our licensors or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful, and issued patents covering our technology and product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged.

Competitors and other third parties may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate our owned and licensed patents or other intellectual property. In addition, our owned and licensed patents may become involved in inventorship or priority disputes. Our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent is issued from such applications. To counter infringement or other unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents or that our patents are invalid or unenforceable.

In a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that an owned or licensed patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our owned and licensed patents do not cover the technology. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our owned or licensed patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable or interpreted narrowly. We may find it impractical or undesirable to enforce our intellectual property against some third parties.

In patent litigation in the U.S., defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or insufficient written description. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution.

Third parties may also raise similar claims before the USPTO or an equivalent foreign body, even outside the context of litigation. Potential proceedings include re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, interference proceedings, derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of, or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our technology or any product candidates that we may develop.

The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on the applicable product candidates or technology covered by the patent rendered invalid or unenforceable. Such a loss of patent protection would harm our business.

Interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the ownership or priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or may be non-exclusive.

If we are unable to obtain and maintain such licenses, we may need to cease the development, manufacture and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates we may develop. In addition, if we, our existing licensors or any future licensors are unsuccessful in any inventorship disputes to which we or they are subject, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or the exclusive right to use, our owned, licensed or any future in-licensed patents. The loss of exclusivity or the narrowing of such patent claims could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products. Any of the foregoing could harm our business. Even if we are successful in any of the foregoing disputes, it could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees.

Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or proceeding.

Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately.

Most of our competitors are larger than we are and have substantially greater resources. They are, therefore, likely to be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating our intellectual property. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources, which could harm our business. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could compromise our ability to raise the funds necessary to initiate anticipated clinical trials, continue our internal research programs or in-license needed technology or other product candidates. There could also be public announcements of the results of the hearing, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive those results to be negative, it could cause the price of shares of our common stock to decline. Any of the foregoing events could harm our business.

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

Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patents and other intellectual property rights on budoprutug, CLYM116 or any other product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the U.S. can be less extensive than those in the U.S. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the U.S.

Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside the U.S., or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the U.S. or other jurisdictions.

Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection or other intellectual property rights to develop their own products and may export otherwise infringing, misappropriating or violating products to territories where we have patent or other intellectual property protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the U.S. These products may compete with budoprutug or any other product candidates, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our intellectual property rights generally.

Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful.

Many countries, including EU countries, India, Japan and China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled under specified circumstances to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors.

In those countries, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license, which could harm our business.

We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our product candidates.

We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending patent application in the U.S. and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of budoprutug or any other product candidates in any jurisdiction. For example, U.S. patent applications filed before November 29, 2000, and certain U.S. patent applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the U.S. remain confidential until patents issue. Patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering budoprutug or any other product candidates could have been filed by third parties without our knowledge. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover budoprutug or any other product candidates or their use. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market budoprutug or any other product candidates. We may incorrectly determine that budoprutug or any other product candidates are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the U.S. or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market budoprutug or any other product candidates.

Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market such product candidates. If we fail to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents or if we are unable to obtain licenses to relevant patents, we may be subject to infringement claims. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such infringement claims. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, which may be significant, we may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing any of our product candidates that are held to be infringing. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign product candidates so that we no longer infringe the third-party intellectual property rights. Any of these events, even if we were ultimately to prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business and could harm our business.

If we fail to comply with our obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property rights from our licensors, otherwise experience disruption to our business relationships with our licensors, or we are unable to obtain licenses from other third parties on commercially reasonable terms or fail to comply with our obligations under such agreements, we could lose license rights that our important to our business and our business could be harmed.

We are a party to a number of license agreements under which we are granted rights to intellectual property that are important to our business, and we may enter into additional license agreements in the future for budoprutug or any other product candidates.

Our existing license agreements impose on us, and we expect that any future license agreements where we in-licenses intellectual property will impose on us, various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones and/or royalties and other obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are subject to bankruptcy-related proceedings, our licensors may have the right to terminate our licenses, in which case, we would not be able to market products covered by the licenses.

With respect to budoprutug, we obtained our right to a number of existing license agreements pursuant to an asset purchase agreement with Acelyrin, Inc., or Acelyrin, which imposes on us various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones and/or royalties and other obligations.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under the asset purchase agreement, Acelyrin may have the right to re-purchase the obtained asset, including our rights to the licenses subject to the asset purchase agreement, in which case, we may not be able to market or develop budoprutug.

With respect to CLYM116, we have an existing license agreement with Mabworks, which imposes on us various development, regulatory and/or commercial diligence obligations, payment of milestones and/or royalties and other obligations.

If we fail to comply with our obligations under the license agreement, Mabworks may have the right to terminate the license agreement, in which case, we may not be able to market or develop CLYM116.

We may need to obtain additional licenses from third parties to advance our research or commercialize budoprutug or any other product candidates, and we cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist that might be enforced against budoprutug or such other product candidates in the absence of such a license. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and several more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize budoprutug or any other product candidates, which could materially harm our business and the third parties owning such intellectual property rights could seek either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation. Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including:

If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms, we may not be able to successfully develop and commercialize our product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.

Moreover, some of our patents and patent applications in the future may be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, who could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us.

Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on budoprutug or any other product candidates for an adequate amount of time.

Patents have a limited lifespan. In the U.S., if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date.

Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering budoprutug or any other product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product candidate, we may be open to competition from competitive medications, including generic medications.

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

In addition, we intend, or understand that our licensors intend, to pursue additional patent protection covering, when possible, compositions, methods of use, methods of manufacture, and dosing and formulations of budoprutug. Any patent that may be issued from our owned pending patent applications is expected to expire in 2045, excluding any patent term adjustment that might be available following the grant of the patent and any patent term extensions that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations.

With respect to budoprutug, the issued patents, or patents that may be issued from the pending patent applications that we exclusively in-licenses from CRH are expected to expire in 2026, excluding any patent term adjustment that might be available following the grant of the patent and any patent term extensions that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations. In each instance of the above, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to budoprutug.

With respect to CLYM116, the patents that may be issued from the pending patent application that we exclusively in-license from Mabworks are expected to expire in 2044, excluding any patent term adjustment that might be available following the grant of the patent and any patent term extensions that might be available following the grant of marketing authorizations. In each instance of the above, our patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to CLYM116.

Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of any FDA marketing approval of budoprutug or any other product candidates, one or more of our U.S. owned or licensed patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and one or more of our foreign owned or licensed patents may be eligible for patent term extension under similar legislation, for example, in the EU. In the U.S., the Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, there are no assurances that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority or national patent office will grant such extensions, in whole or in part. For example, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. Only one patent per approved product can be extended, the extension cannot extend the total patent term beyond 14 years from approval, and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended.

If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for the applicable product candidate will be shortened, and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced.

Further, if this occurs, our competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case, and our competitive position and business could be harmed.

Changes in patent law could diminish the value of our patents, thereby impairing our ability to protect our intellectual property for budoprutug or any other product candidates.

Our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry is inherently uncertain, due in part to ongoing changes in the patent laws.

Depending on decisions by Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO and equivalent institutions in other jurisdictions, the laws and regulations governing patents, and interpretation thereof, could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce existing or future patents.

For example, the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations.

Therefore, there is increased uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, as well as uncertainty with respect to the value of patents once obtained.

Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued and licensed patents. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the U.S., the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the U.S., the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent.

After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (Leahy-Smith Act) enacted in September 2011, the U.S. transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. The Leahy-Smith Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. The USPTO recently developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, particularly the first inventor-to-file provisions. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued or licensed patents, all of which could harm our business.

Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated if we fail to comply with these requirements.

Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on any patents and patent applications are required to be paid to the USPTO and foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of a patent. In certain circumstances, we may rely on our licensors to pay these fees. The USPTO and various foreign patent agencies also require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar requirements during the patent application and prosecution process.

Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include failure to respond to official communications within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in irrevocable abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction.

If we or our licensors, or any future licensors or collaborators, fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering budoprutug or any other product candidates, our competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products or technology, which would harm our business.

Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could negatively impact the success of our business.

Our commercial success depends upon our ability and the ability of any of our collaborators to develop, manufacture, market and sell budoprutug and any other product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may become party to, or be threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to budoprutug or any other product candidates and technology, including re-examination, interference, post-grant review, inter partes review or derivation proceedings before the USPTO or an equivalent foreign body. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. In the event that any of these patents were asserted against us, we believe that we would have defenses against any such action, including that such patents are not valid or that we would be able to replace such technology with alternative, non-infringing technology.

However, if any such patents were to be asserted against us and our defenses to such assertion were unsuccessful and such alternative technology was not available or technologically or commercially practical, unless we obtain a license to such patents, we could be liable for damages, which could be significant and include treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to willfully infringe such patents, and we could be precluded from commercializing any product candidates that were ultimately held to infringe such patents. Any potential future legal proceedings relating to these patents could cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. If we are unsuccessful in our challenges to these patents and become subject to litigation or are unable to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms with respect to these patents, it could harm our business.

Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. Even if we believe third-party intellectual property claims are without merit, there is no assurance that a court would find in our favor on questions of infringement, validity, enforceability or priority.

A court of competent jurisdiction could hold that third-party patents asserted against us are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could adversely affect our ability to commercialize budoprutug or any other product candidates we may develop, and any other product candidates or technologies covered by the asserted third- party patents. To successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent.

If we are found to infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate a third party’s intellectual property rights, and we are unsuccessful in demonstrating that such rights are invalid or unenforceable, we could be required to obtain a license from such a third party to continue developing and marketing our products and technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing technology or product candidates. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing budoprutug or any other product candidates we may develop or force us to cease some of our business operations. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties and other fees, redesign our infringing drug or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business.

We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that we or our employees have infringed upon, misappropriated or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.

Many of our employees were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of any such individual’s former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims.

In addition, we or our future licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our owned, licensed or any future in-licensed patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. While it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact conceives, develops or reduces to practice intellectual property that we regard as our own. Our and their assignment agreements may not be self-executing or may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property.

If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel.

Even if we are successful in prosecuting or defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs, delay development of our product candidates and be a distraction to management. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business.

Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities.

Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities.

In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources.

Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace, including compromising our ability to raise the funds necessary to initiate anticipated clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties or enter into development collaborations that would help us commercialize budoprutug or any other product candidates, if approved. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business.

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

We rely on trade secrets and confidentiality agreements to protect our unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information and to maintain our competitive position. Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect these trade secrets and other proprietary technology, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, licensors, collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the U.S. are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets.

If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, our competitive position would be harmed.

If we or our licensors do not apply for patent protection prior to such publication or if we cannot otherwise maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary technology and other confidential information, then our ability to obtain patent protection or to protect our trade secret information may be jeopardized.

As is common in the biopharmaceutical industry, we engage the services of consultants to assist us in the development of our product candidates. Many of these consultants were previously employed at, or may have previously provided or may be currently providing consulting services to, other biopharmaceutical companies including our competitors or potential competitors.

We may become subject to claims that we or our consultants inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other information proprietary to our consultants’ former employers or their former or current clients. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management team.

We may not be able to protect and enforce our trademarks and trade names, or build name recognition in our markets of interest thereby harming our competitive position.

We intend to rely on both registered and common law rights for our trademarks. We plan to apply to register these trademarks with the USPTO and may in the future seek to register additional trademarks in the U.S. and other countries.

Our trademark applications may not be allowed for registration in a timely fashion or at all, and our future registered trademarks may not be maintained or enforced. In addition, any registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names that we own or will own may be challenged, infringed, circumvented, declared generic, lapsed or determined to be infringing on or dilutive of other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights in these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. In addition, third parties have filed, and may in the future file, for registration of trademarks similar or identical to our trademarks, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. If they succeed in registering or developing common law rights in such trademarks, and if we are not successful in challenging such rights, we may not be able to use these trademarks to develop brand recognition of our technologies, products or services.

In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names.

During the trademark registration process, we may receive Office Actions from the USPTO or from comparable agencies in foreign jurisdictions objecting to the registration of our trademark. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those objections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections.

In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and/or to seek the cancellation of registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may in the future be filed against our trademark applications or registrations, and our trademark applications or registrations may not survive such proceedings. In addition, third parties may file first for our trademarks in certain countries. If they succeed in registering such trademarks, and if we are not successful in challenging such third-party rights, we may not be able to use these trademarks to market our products in those countries. If we do not secure registrations for our trademarks, we may encounter more difficulty in enforcing them against third parties than we otherwise would. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively, which could harm our business.

Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats.

The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example:

Should any of these events occur, they could harm our business.

Risks Related to our Business Operations and Employee Matters

If our information technology systems or data, or those of third parties upon which we rely, such as CROs, are or were compromised or interrupted, we could experience adverse consequences resulting from such compromise or interruption, including but not limited to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of customers or sales; and other adverse consequences.

In the ordinary course of our business, we may collect, store, use, transmit, disclose, or otherwise process proprietary, confidential, and sensitive data, including personal data (such as health-related data), intellectual property, and trade secrets using information technology networks and systems, including the Internet and artificial intelligence-based software.

Cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud, and other similar activities threaten the confidentiality, integrity and availability of our data and information technology systems, and those of the third parties upon which we rely. Such threats are prevalent and continue to increase, and are becoming increasingly difficult to detect. These threats come from a variety of sources.

In addition to traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists”, organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation-states, and nation-state-supported actors now engage in attacks. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities.

During times of war and other major conflicts, we, and the third parties upon which we rely, may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and harm our business.

We and the third parties upon which we rely, such as CROs, may be subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through the use of artificial intelligence and deep fakes, which may become increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks (such as credential stuffing), credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, telecommunications failures, geopolitical developments, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. Ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and severe and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments.

We also rely upon third-party service providers and technologies to operate critical business systems to process confidential information and personal data in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, third-party providers of cloud-based infrastructure, encryption and authentication technology, employee email and other functions.

Our ability to monitor these third parties’ cybersecurity practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. We may share or receive sensitive data with or from third parties, and if they experience a security incident or other interruption, we could experience adverse consequences.

Similarly, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties and infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been affected. While we may be entitled to damages if our third-party service providers fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award.

Some of our personnel work from home, which poses increased risks to our information technology systems and data as they utilize network connections outside our premises. Future business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate companies into our information technology environment and security program.

Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption. A security incident or other interruption could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our data or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties upon whom we rely. Additionally, sensitive data could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employee’s, personnel’s, or vendor’s use of generative artificial intelligence technologies. If such an event were to occur, it could result in a material disruption of our development programs and our business operations. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Likewise, we rely on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and to conduct clinical trials, and similar events relating to their computer systems could also harm our business.

We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities (including future clinical trial activities) to protect against security incidents. Certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to implement and maintain specific security measures, industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and data. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We take steps to detect and remediate vulnerabilities, but we may be unable in the future to detect and remediate vulnerabilities because such threats and techniques change frequently, are often sophisticated in nature, and therefore may not be detected until after a security incident has occurred. These vulnerabilities therefore may pose material risks to our business. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures designed to address any such identified vulnerabilities.

Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders of security incidents. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosures or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third party upon whom we rely) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences.

These consequences may include: government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing data (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary expenditures; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms.

Security incidents and attendant consequences may cause delays in the development of our product candidates and negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business.

Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations. We cannot be sure that our insurance coverage will be adequate or sufficient of protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices, that such coverage will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or that such coverage will pay future claims. In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position.

For additional information regarding our cybersecurity risk management, strategy and governance, please see “Cybersecurity” under Part I, Item 1C of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

If we fail to attract and retain management and other key personnel, we may be unable to continue to successfully develop or commercialize our product candidates or otherwise implement our business plan.

Our ability to compete in the highly competitive pharmaceuticals industry depends on our ability to attract and retain highly qualified managerial, scientific, medical, legal, sales and marketing and other personnel. We are highly dependent on recruiting and retaining our management and scientific personnel.

The loss of the services of any of these individuals could impede, delay or prevent the successful development of our product candidates, completion of our planned clinical trials, commercialization of any such product candidates or in-licensing or acquisition of new assets and could negatively impact our ability to successfully implement our business plan. If we lose the services of any of these individuals, we might not be able to find suitable replacements on a timely basis or at all, and our business could be harmed as a result. We might not be able to attract or retain qualified management and other key personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses.

Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, licensors, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs and vendors may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity.

Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violates (1) the laws and regulations of the FDA, the EMA, the MHRA and other similar regulatory authorities, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities, (2) manufacturing standards, (3) federal and state data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the U.S. and abroad and (4) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Misconduct by these parties could also involve the improper use of individually identifiable information, including information obtained in the course of clinical trials, creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of product candidates, which could result in regulatory sanctions and harm our reputation.

We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics, but it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred.

If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, contractual damages, reputational harm and the delay, reduction, termination or restructuring of our operations.

Any international operations we may have exposes us to business, regulatory, political, operational, financial, pricing and reimbursement risks associated with doing business outside of the U.S.

Our business is subject to risks associated with conducting business internationally. Our business strategy incorporates potential international expansion as we seek to conduct clinical trials, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates in patient populations outside the U.S. If approved, we may hire sales representatives and conduct physician and patient association outreach activities outside of the U.S. Doing business internationally involves a number of risks, including but not limited to:

Any of these factors could harm our future international expansion and operations and, consequently, our results of operations.

We may not be able to utilize a significant portion of our net operating loss carryforwards.

As of December 31, 2024, we had net operating loss (NOL) carryforwards of approximately $23.3 million for federal income tax purposes, $68.6 million for foreign income tax purposes and $10.7 million for state income tax purposes.

The federal NOLs may be used to offset up to 80% of future taxable income each year while the state and foreign losses may be used to offset up to 100% of future taxable income. The federal NOL carryforwards can be carried forward indefinitely while the state NOL carryforwards will begin to expire in varying amounts in 2038. The NOL carryforwards subject to expiration could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities.

Separately, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (Internal Revenue Code) and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change, by value, in its equity ownership by certain stockholders over a rolling three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. Transactions that have occurred since our inception, including the Acquisition, may have triggered such an ownership change pursuant to Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code. We have not completed a Section 382 analysis, and therefore, there can be no assurances that the NOL carryforwards are not already limited. However, we believe a limitation, if any, would have an immaterial impact on our ability to utilize existing NOLs in the future.

In addition, we may experience ownership changes in the future due to subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which are out of our control. If an ownership change occurs and our ability to use our NOL carryforwards is materially limited, it could harm our future operating results by effectively increasing our future tax obligations.

We have and may continue to seek to grow our business through acquisitions or investments in new or complementary businesses, products or technologies, through the licensing of products or technologies from third parties or through other strategic alliances, and the failure to manage acquisitions, investments, licenses or other strategic alliances, or the failure to integrate them with our existing business, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, dilute our stockholders’ ownership, increase our debt or cause us to incur significant expense.

Our success depends on our ability to continually enhance and broaden our product offerings in response to changing clinician and patients’ needs, competitive technologies and market pressures. Accordingly, we have and may continue to consider opportunities to acquire, make investments in or license other technologies, products and businesses that may enhance our capabilities, complement our existing products and technologies or expand the breadth of our markets or customer base. For example, we entered into the Mabworks Agreement where we acquired licenses for the development, manufacture and commercialization of CLYM116 and products containing CLYM116 in certain territories.

Potential and completed acquisitions, strategic investments, licenses and other alliances, including our acquisition of Tenet Medicines, Inc. and the Mabworks Agreement, involve numerous risks, including:

To finance any acquisitions, investments or strategic alliances, we may choose to issue shares of our common stock as consideration, which could dilute the ownership of our stockholders. For example, in June 2024 we issued 5,560,047 shares of our common stock as consideration in connection with the closing of the Acquisition, and we issued 31,238,282 shares of our common in connection with the closing of the related private placement, resulting in the issuance of a total of an additional 36,798,329 shares of our common stock.

If the price of our common stock is low or volatile, we may be unable to consummate any acquisitions, investments or strategic alliances using our common stock as consideration. Additional funds may not be available on terms favorable to us, or at all.

Risks Related to our Common Stock

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

Our stock price has been volatile, fluctuating from a high trading price of $29.69 per share in August 2021 to a low trading price of $1.25 in March 2025. The stock market in general and the market for biotechnology companies in particular have also experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. The market price for our common stock may continue to be volatile in the future and may be influenced by many factors, including:

In the past, stockholders have initiated class action lawsuits against pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies following periods of volatility in the market prices of these companies’ stock, in particular following significant drops in stock price. Such litigation, if instituted against us, could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources from our business. In addition, in the current volatile market for biotechnology stocks, in particular where shares are trading below cash balances, certain biotechnology investors have advocated for increases in short-term stockholder value through proposed corporate actions such as financial restructurings, special dividends, stock repurchases, mergers, other business combinations or sales of assets. Any such proposals directed at us could cause us to incur substantial costs and divert management’s attention and resources from our business.

Because we do not anticipate paying any cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future, capital appreciation, if any, will be your sole source of gain.

We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our capital stock. We currently intend to retain all of our future earnings, if any, to finance the growth and development of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain for the foreseeable future.

We have broad discretion in the use of our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities and may not use them effectively.

Our management has broad discretion in the application of our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities and could use such funds in ways that do not improve our results of operations or enhance the value of our common stock or in ways that our stockholders may not agree with.

The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could result in financial losses that could cause the price of our common stock to decline and delay the development of our product candidates. Pending their use, we may invest these funds in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value.

A significant portion of our common stock may be sold into the market, which could cause the market price of our common stock to drop significantly.

Sales of a substantial number of shares of our common stock in the public market could occur at any time. If our stockholders sell, or the market perceives that our stockholders intend to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the market price of our common stock could decline significantly.

We have registered and intend to continue to register all shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plans. These shares can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to volume limitations applicable to affiliates.

Additionally, the holders of an aggregate of 15.7 million shares of our common stock, or their transferees, have rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file one or more registration statements covering their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. If we were to register the resale of these shares, they could be freely sold in the public market without limitation. If these additional shares are sold, or if it is perceived that they will be sold, in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline.

In connection with the private placement related to the Acquisition, we entered into a registration rights agreement, pursuant to which we are required to register for resale the shares to be purchased in the private placement and the consideration issued in the Acquisition. Pursuant to this agreement, in July 2024, we filed a registration statement covering the resale of the shares purchased by the purchasers in the private placement and the consideration issued in connection with the Acquisition.

In addition, we have agreed to use commercially reasonable efforts to cause such registration statement to become effective as soon as practicable after it is filed with the SEC and to keep such registration statement effective until the date the shares covered by the registration statement have been sold or can be resold without restriction under Rule 144 of the Securities Act.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of our company more difficult, limit attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management and limit the market price of our common stock.

Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws, as currently in effect, may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change of control or changes in our management. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws include provisions that:

These provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of our management.

In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL) which generally, subject to certain exceptions, prohibits a Delaware corporation from engaging in any of a broad range of business combinations with any “interested” stockholder for a period of three years following the date on which the stockholder became an “interested” stockholder. Any delay or prevention of a change of control transaction or changes in our management could cause the market price of our common stock to decline.

Claims for indemnification by our directors and officers may reduce our available funds to satisfy successful third-party claims against us and may reduce the amount of money available to us.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws provide that we will indemnify our directors and officers, in each case to the fullest extent permitted by Delaware law.

In addition, as permitted by Section 145 of the DGCL, our amended and restated bylaws and our indemnification agreements that we have entered into with our directors and officers provide that:

We may not retroactively amend our amended and restated bylaw provisions to reduce our indemnification obligations to directors, officers, employees and agents.

Concentration of ownership of our common stock among our existing executive officers, directors and principal stockholders, including affiliates of RA Capital Management L.P., may limit or prevent new investors from influencing significant corporate decisions and also reduces the public float for our common stock, which could make our common stock less attractive to some investors or otherwise harm our stock price.

Based upon our common stock outstanding as of December 31, 2024, our executive officers, directors and current beneficial owners of 5% or more of our common stock, in the aggregate, beneficially own approximately 62.5% of our outstanding common stock. In particular, affiliates of RA Capital Management, L.P., own approximately 46.7% of our outstanding common stock. These stockholders, acting together, are able to significantly influence all matters requiring stockholder approval, including the election and removal of directors and any merger or other significant corporate transaction. The interests of this group of stockholders may not coincide with the interests of other stockholders.

In addition, as a result of this concentration of ownership, there is a limited number of number of shares of our common stock that are not held by officers, directors and principal stockholders (which is referred to as our public float), thereby adversely impacting the liquidity of our common stock and potentially depressing the price at which you may be able to sell shares of common stock.

We have identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. If we are unable to remediate these material weaknesses, or if we identify additional material weaknesses in the future or otherwise fail to maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations, which may adversely affect our business.

Prior to the completion of our initial public offering, we were a private company with limited accounting personnel to adequately execute our accounting processes and other supervisory resources with which to address our internal control over financial reporting. In connection with the preparation of our consolidated financial statements for the year ended December 31, 2020, we identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting, two of which remain unremediated as of December 31, 2024. The unremediated material weaknesses, and our remediation plan, are disclosed in Item 9A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

We believe we have made substantial progress toward achieving the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. The actions that have been taken are subject to continued review and testing by management as well as oversight by the audit committee of our board of directors. We will not be able to conclude whether the steps we have taken will fully remediate these material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting until we have completed our remediation efforts and subsequent evaluation of their effectiveness.

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

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (Exchange Act), the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and the rules and regulations of the Nasdaq Stock Market. Section 302 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we report on the effectiveness of our disclosure controls and procedures in our quarterly and annual reports and Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires that we perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our Form 10-K filings.

We cannot assure you that the measures we have taken to date, and are continuing to implement, or any measures we may take in the future, will be sufficient to identify or prevent future material weaknesses. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting in our first annual report required to be filed with the SEC following the date we are no longer an emerging growth company or a smaller reporting company with less than $100 million in revenue.

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our stock could decline and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the Nasdaq Stock Market, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. In addition, our common stock may not be able to remain listed on the Nasdaq Stock Market or any other securities exchange.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation designates the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and, to the extent enforceable, the federal district courts of the United States of America as the exclusive forums for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which restricts our stockholders’ ability to choose the judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees.

Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for the following types of claims or causes of action under Delaware statutory or common law: any derivative claims or causes of action brought on our behalf; any claims or causes of action asserting a breach of a fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, or our amended and restated bylaws; or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. In addition, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation provides that the federal district courts of the United States of America will be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act. These choice of forum provisions will not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act or any other claim for which the federal courts have exclusive jurisdiction.

Such provisions are intended to benefit and may be enforced by us, our officers and directors, employees and agents, including the underwriters for any offering giving rise to such complaint and any other professional or entity who has prepared or certified any part of the document underlying the offering and may result in increased costs for stockholders to bring a claim.

We believe these provisions may benefit us by providing increased consistency in the application of Delaware law and federal securities laws by chancellors and judges, as applicable, particularly experienced in resolving corporate disputes, efficient administration of cases on a more expedited schedule relative to other forums and protection against the burdens of multi-forum litigation. These choice of forum provisions may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims or make such lawsuits more costly for stockholders, although our stockholders will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. While the Delaware courts have determined that such choice of forum provisions are facially valid, a stockholder may nevertheless seek to bring a claim in a venue other than those designated in the exclusive forum provisions, and there can be no assurance that such provisions will be enforced by a court in those other jurisdictions. If a court were to find either choice of forum provision contained in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions.

General Risk Factors

We have been and may in the future become involved in securities litigation or stockholder derivative litigation in connection with the Acquisition, the related private placement and the other transactions contemplated by the Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization, dated April 10, 2024, by and among our company, Tango Merger Sub, Inc., a Delaware corporation and our wholly owned subsidiary, Tenet, and, solely in his capacity as Tenet equityholder representative, Stephen Thomas (the Acquisition Agreement), and this could divert the attention of our management and harm our business.

Securities litigation or stockholder derivative litigation frequently follows the announcement of certain significant business transactions, such as the sale of a business division or announcement of an acquisition or a business combination transaction.

We have been involved in and may in the future become involved in this type of litigation in connection with the Acquisition, the related private placement and/or the other transactions contemplated by the Acquisition Agreement. Litigation often is expensive and diverts management’s attention and resources, which could adversely affect our business.

For example, as previously disclosed, certain of our purported stockholders sent demand letters and two lawsuits were filed by our purported stockholders, generally alleging that the preliminary proxy statement and/or definitive proxy statement in connection with the Acquisition omitted certain purportedly material information, and sought corrective disclosure to the proxy statement, as well as an assertion of a claim for breach of fiduciary duty against us and our directors. We deny any breach of any duties to our stockholders and believes that no supplemental disclosures were required under applicable law, but there can be no assurance that any of these or other disputes can be resolved favorably or at all.

If equity research analysts do not publish research or reports, or publish unfavorable research or reports, about us, our business or our market, our stock price and trading volume could decline.

The trading market for our common stock may be influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. We currently have limited equity analyst coverage, and such a lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. For instance, lack of regular coverage may result in demand for our stock to decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline. In the event we do have additional equity research analyst coverage, we will not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research.

Unfavorable global economic conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition, stock price, and results of operations.

The global credit and financial markets have experienced extreme volatility and disruptions (including as a result of actual or perceived changes in interest rates, inflation and macroeconomic uncertainties), which has included severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, high inflation, uncertainty about economic stability, and increases in unemployment rates.

The financial markets and the global economy may also be adversely affected by the current or anticipated impact of military conflict, including the conflicts between Russia and Ukraine and Israel and Hamas, terrorism, or other geopolitical events. Sanctions, tariffs and general trade policy changes imposed by the U.S. and other countries may also continue to adversely impact the financial markets and the global economy, and any economic countermeasures by the affected countries or others could exacerbate market and economic instability. In addition, there is a risk that our current or future service providers, manufacturers or other collaborators could be severely impacted by such conflicts and policy changes or may not survive such difficult economic times, which could directly affect our ability to conduct our clinical trials and attain our operating goals on schedule and on budget.

There can be no assurance that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including a decrease in the demand for our product candidates and in our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. In addition, current inflationary trends in the global economy may impact salaries and wages, costs of goods and transportation expenses, among other things, and recent and potential future disruptions in access to bank deposits or lending commitments due to bank failures may create market and economic instability. We cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the foregoing, and the current economic climate and financial market conditions generally, could adversely impact our business.

We are an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company,” and as a result of the reduced reporting requirements applicable to “emerging growth companies” and “smaller reporting companies,” our common stock may be less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an “emerging growth company,” we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not “emerging growth companies,” including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We may take advantage of these exemptions until we are no longer an “emerging growth company.”

We could be an “emerging growth company” until December 31, 2026, although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if the aggregate market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of any June 30 (the end of our second fiscal quarter) before that time, in which case we would no longer be an “emerging growth company” as of the following December 31 (our fiscal year-end).

We are also a “smaller reporting company,” as defined in the Exchange Act. Even after we no longer qualify as an “emerging growth company,” we may still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to continue to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and the price of our common stock may be more volatile.

We may be unable to maintain adequate insurance coverage.

We presently have general liability, workers’ compensation, directors’ and officers’, cybersecurity, and product liability insurance coverage. Although we believe we will be able to maintain such coverage for a reasonable cost and obtain any additional coverages that our business may require, no assurances can be made that we will be able to do so.

Changes in tax laws or regulations that are applied adversely to us may seriously harm our business.

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could affect the tax treatment of any of our future domestic and foreign earnings. For example, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) has introduced rules to establish a global minimum tax rate of 15 percent, commonly referred to as the Pillar Two rules. Many countries have enacted legislation to implement the Pillar Two rules.

We are currently evaluating the potential impacts that Pillar Two rules may have on future periods and will continue to monitor the implementation of the Pillar Two rules in the jurisdictions in which we do business. Any new or modified taxes, including the Pillar Two rules, could adversely affect our domestic and international business operations, and our business and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us.