Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Not applicable.

Our business is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties that may adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, and prospects. These risks are discussed more fully below and include, but are not limited to:

Risks Related to Our Limited Operating History, Financial Condition, and Capital Requirements

Our business could be materially adversely affected by the effects of health pandemics or epidemics, including the current outbreak of COVID-19 and future coronavirus outbreaks, and in particular in regions where we or third parties on which we rely have significant manufacturing facilties, concentrations of clinical trial sites or other business operations.

Our business could be materially adversely affected by the effects of health pandemics or epidemics, including the current outbreak of COVID-19, which the World Health Organization, or WHO, declared a global pandemic and which has prompted severe lifestyle and commercial restrictions aimed at reducing the spread of the disease. Since March 2020, the U.S. federal and state and non-U.S. governments have implemented restricted travel and shelter-in-place orders, which, among other things, directed individuals to shelter at their places of residence, directed businesses and governmental agencies to cease non-essential operations at physical locations, prohibited certain non-essential gatherings, and ordered cessation of non-essential travel. As a result of these developments, we implemented work-from-home policies for most of our employees. We also implemented social distancing and sanitary measures. Some of our clinical study sites had to be closed, and we had to revise the protocols and obtain IRB review and approval to continue our clinical trials. With the second wave of COVID-19, governments have imposed and may impose further quarantines or other restrictions, which may negatively impact productivity, disrupt our business and delay our clinical programs and timelines, the magnitude of which will depend, in part, on the length and severity of the restrictions, the potential impact of changing government orders in response to the spread of COVID-19 cases and other limitations on our ability to conduct our business in the ordinary course. Although we do not anticipate any impacts to our clinical programs, these and similar, and perhaps more severe, disruptions in our operations could negatively impact our business operating results and financial condition in the future.

Quarantines, shutdowns and shelter-in-place and similar government orders related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases, or the perception that such events, orders or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations could occur, could impact personnel at third-party supplier, manufacturing or packaging facilities in the United States and other countries, or the availability or costs of materials, which could disrupt our supply chain. Although we do not anticipate any clinical supply issues or concerns for our planned clinical trials, restrictions resulting from the COVID-19 outbreak may disrupt our supply chain in the future and delay or limit our ability to obtain sufficient materials for our drug candidates.

In addition, our current clinical trial and planned clinical trials may be affected by the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic. Site initiation and patient enrollment may be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward the COVID-19 pandemic, and sites conducting potential patient enrollment may not be able or willing to comply with clinical trial protocols whether due to quarantines impeding patient movement or interrupting healthcare services, or due to potential patient concerns regarding interactions with medical facilities or staff. Similarly, our ability to recruit and retain principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to COVID-19, may be delayed or disrupted, which may adversely impact our clinical trial operations. Furthermore, when the primary endpoint of one of our studies is a site-based assessment, there is a risk that participants will not be able to or want to undergo this required in person assessment for safety reasons, resulting in a delay to our studies and potentially compromising the timing and results of our study. COVID-19 may also lead to increased costs, due to a prolonged study timeframe, resulting in the need to add study staff and the need to utilize additional technological tools, such as remote monitoring, remote source-data verification and remote audits.

Regulatory authorities may also experience a significantly increased workload, with requirements and demands for short review timelines for COVID-19 studies on the one hand and the need to amend study protocols to address COVID-19-related limitations in study conduct on the other hand. This can prolong review timelines and reduce the availability to run expedited programs which put a high demand on regulatory staff. There is also a risk that the changes to protocols of ongoing clinical trials (other than for COVID-19 indications) that were made to address restrictions imposed in the context of the coronavirus pandemic will negatively impact the review conducted by the relevant regulatory agencies. In which case, such agencies may consider the data to be insufficient to support acceptance of the data and the statistical plan. For example, changing in-office and in-person checks and visits to phone contacts may not be sufficient for regulatory review. We will not know until we complete our ongoing studies, complete analysis, and submit such data what, if any, limitations and effects could result.

In addition, the global COVID-19 pandemic has adversely affected, and any future significant outbreak of contagious diseases could similarly adversely affect, the economics and financial markets of many countries, including the United States, resulting in an economic downturn that could reduce our ability to access capital, which could negatively affect our liquidity and ability to process our clinical trials and business operations and suppress demand for our future products. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or cash flow. In addition, a recession, down-turn or market correction resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic could materially adversely affect the value of our ADSs and ordinary shares. 

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with no products approved for commercial sale. We have incurred significant losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future.

Biotechnology product development is a highly speculative undertaking because it entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential drug candidate will not demonstrate adequate effectiveness in the targeted indication or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval or become commercially viable. We have incurred significant losses since our inception in 2006, and we anticipate that we will continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, which, together with our limited operating history, may make it difficult to assess our future viability.

We incurred losses of €14.0 million, €17.8 million and €17.1 million ($20.9 million) (translated solely for convenience into dollars at an exchange rate of €1.00=$1.223, the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 31, 2020) for the years ended December 31, 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our preclinical and clinical programs and other research and development activities and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase as we continue to develop our drug candidates, conduct clinical trials and pursue research and development activities. Even if we achieve profitability in the future, we may not be able to sustain profitability in subsequent periods. Our prior losses, combined with expected future losses, have had and will continue to have an adverse effect on our shareholders’ equity and working capital.

We will require substantial additional financing to achieve our goals, and a failure to obtain this capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development or other operations.

Since our inception, we have invested a significant portion of our efforts and financial resources on our preclinical studies and clinical trials and other research and development activities. We believe that we will continue to expend substantial resources for the foreseeable future in connection with the preclinical and clinical development of our current drug candidates and the discovery and development of any other drug candidates we may choose to pursue. These expenditures will include costs associated with conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials and obtaining regulatory approvals, and any expenses associated with commercializing, marketing and selling products approved for sale that we elect to commercialize ourselves. In addition, other unanticipated costs may arise. Because the outcome of any preclinical study or clinical trial is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amounts necessary to successfully complete the development of our current drug candidates or any future drug candidates we may choose to pursue.

As of December 31, 2020, we had capital resources consisting of cash, cash equivalents, and other current financial assets of €18.7 million ($22.9 million) (translated solely for convenience into dollars at an exchange rate of €1.00=$1.223, the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 31, 2020). Since December 31, 2020, we have received approximately €13.49 million ($16.35 million, using the exchange rate of €1.00 = $1.212 on February 12, 2021, the closing date) in net proceeds from our U.S. initial public offering of ADSs, which closed on February 12, 2021. We have also issued an aggregate of 377,210 ordinary shares upon the conversion of share subscription warrants and founders’ warrants for a total consideration of €101.8 thousand. We also repaid €567 thousand of the carrying amount of the Kreos loan.

We expect our existing capital resources, including our ability to draw down on our credit facility with ATLAS (as described in further detail in “Item 5, Operating and Financial Review and Prospects” of this annual report), will be enough to fund our planned operating expenses for the next 12 months. However, our current operating plans may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds even sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings or other sources, such as strategic collaborations. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans.

Our future capital requirements depend on many factors, including:

Additional funds may not be available when we need them, on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If adequate funds are not available to us on a timely basis on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to:

We do not expect to realize revenue from sales of products or royalties from licensed products in the foreseeable future, if at all, unless and until our drug candidates are clinically tested, approved for commercialization and successfully marketed. To date, we have primarily financed our operations through the sale of debt and equity securities, as well as public aid for innovation and reimbursement of the French research tax credit, described elsewhere in this annual report. We will need to seek additional funding in the future and currently intend to do so through collaborations, public or private equity offerings or debt financings, credit or loan facilities, public funding, or a combination of one or more of these funding sources. Our ability to raise additional funds will depend on financial, economic and other factors, many of which are beyond our control. Additional funds may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we enter into arrangements with collaborators or others, we may be required to relinquish rights to some of our drug candidates that we would otherwise pursue on our own. If we raise additional funds by issuing equity securities, our shareholders will suffer dilution and the terms of any financing may adversely affect the rights of our shareholders. In addition, as a condition to providing additional funds to us, future investors may demand, and may be granted, rights superior to those of existing shareholders. Debt financing, if available, is likely to involve restrictive covenants limiting our flexibility in conducting future business activities, and, in the event of insolvency, debt holders would be repaid before holders of our equity securities received any distribution of our corporate assets.

We have benefited from certain reimbursable financial advances and non-reimbursable subsidies from the French government that if terminated or reduced may restrict our ability to successfully develop, manufacture and commercialize our drug candidates.

We have benefited from certain reimbursable advances and non-reimbursable subsidies from the French government and intend to continue to seek advances and/or subsidies from these agencies in the future in order to accelerate the development of our drug candidates. There is no assurance that these benefits will continue to be available to us in the future. If such benefits and programs were to be terminated or reduced, it could have an adverse effect on our business, operating results and financial condition and could deprive us of financial resources necessary for research and development of our drug candidates. Furthermore, the advances and subsidies are generally subject to contractual conditions, including our compliance with agreed upon preliminary budgets and scientific programs, informing the lender of any deviations from such agreed upon budgets and programs, and our compliance with certain financial ratios to ensure our solvency. In the event that we do not comply with the contractual conditions of the subsidies, we may be required to reimburse the French government for any outstanding payments (€832 thousand as of December 31, 2020) on an accelerated basis and could be liable for any damages incurred by such agencies resulting from the breach of contract.

Due to the significant resources required for the development of our drug candidates, we must prioritize development of certain drug candidates and/or certain disease indications. We may expend our limited resources on candidates or indications that do not yield a successful product and fail to capitalize on drug candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

We plan to develop a pipeline of drug candidates to treat age-related diseases and diseases whose progression and symptoms are similar to those associated with aging. Due to the significant resources required for the development of drug candidates, we must focus our attention and resources on specific diseases and disease pathways and decide which drug candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each.

Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular drug candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of any viable commercial product and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, any decision to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain programs may subsequently prove to be suboptimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our programs or drug candidates or misread trends in the aging or healthspan, or biotechnolgy industry, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other drug candidates or other diseases and disease pathways that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquish valuable rights to such drug candidates through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain development and commercialization rights.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which may make our future operating results difficult to predict.

Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which may make it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including:

The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance.

This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our ordinary shares and ADSs could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.

Our indebtedness could restrict our operations and make us more vulnerable to adverse economic conditions.

On September 10, 2018, we entered into a Venture Loan Agreement and Bonds Issue Agreement with Kreos Capital V (UK) Ltd., or Kreos, which provides for up to €10 million in financing to us. Pursuant to the terms of the agreements, Kreos agreed to subscribe for up to €10 million in non-convertible bonds, to be issued by us in up to four tranches of €2.5 million each. The first two tranches were issued in September 2018, a third tranche was issued in December 2018, and the final tranche was issued on March 1, 2019. Each tranche bears a 10% annual interest rate and must be repaid in 36 monthly installments, with monthly payments of €320,004 commencing in April 2019. In connection with the first tranche, we issued a warrant to Kreos giving them the right to purchase 442,477 new ordinary shares at an exercise price of €2.67 per share over a 7-year period from the issue date.

If we are unable to make the required payments, we may need to refinance all or a portion of our indebtedness, sell assets, delay capital expenditures or seek additional equity. The terms of our existing or future debt agreements may also restrict us from affecting any of these alternatives. Any refinancing of our debt could be at higher interest rates and may require us to comply with more onerous covenants, which could further restrict our business operations. Further, changes in the credit and capital markets, including market disruptions and interest rate fluctuations, may increase the cost of financing, make it more difficult to obtain favorable terms, or restrict our access to these sources of future liquidity. In addition, any failure to make scheduled payments of interest and principal on our outstanding indebtedness would likely result in a reduction of our credit rating, which could harm our ability to incur additional indebtedness on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Our inability to generate sufficient cash flow to satisfy our debt service obligations, or to refinance or restructure our obligations on commercially reasonable terms or at all, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as on our ability to satisfy our obligations in respect of our indebtedness.

Pursuant to the terms of the agreements, we have the right, at any time but with no less than 30 days prior notice to Kreos, to prepay or purchase the bonds, exclusively in full. The prepayment will be equal to (i) the principal amount outstanding, plus (ii) the sum of all interest repayments which would have been paid throughout the remainder of the term of the relevant tranche discounted by 10% per annum.

Our debt agreements contain restrictions that limit our flexibility in operating our business.

Our Venture Loan Agreement and Bonds Issue Agreement with Kreos and our convertible notes agreement with ATLAS Special Opportunities LLC, or ATLAS, impose certain operating and financial restrictions. These covenants may limit our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries, under certain circumstances, to, among other things:

These agreements also contain certain customary affirmative covenants and events of default, including a change of control.

As a result of the covenants and restrictions contained in our existing debt agreements, we are limited in how we conduct our business, and we may be unable to raise additional debt to compete effectively or to take advantage of new business opportunities. The terms of any future indebtedness we may incur could include more restrictive covenants. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to maintain compliance with these covenants in the future and, if we fail to do so, that we will be able to obtain waivers from Kreos and ATLAS, and/or amend the covenants.

Our failure to comply with the restrictive covenants described above as well as others contained in our future debt instruments from time to time could result in an event of default, which, if not cured or waived, could result in our being required to repay these borrowings before their maturity dates. In addition, any event of default or declaration of acceleration under one debt instrument could also result in an event of default under one or more of our other debt instruments. If we are unable to repay, refinance or restructure our indebtedness under our secured debt, the holders of such debt could proceed against the collateral securing that indebtedness. If we are forced to refinance these borrowings on less favorable terms or if we are unable to repay, refinance or restructure such indebtedness, our financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected. 

Risks Related to Our Business

Our business is dependent on the successful development, regulatory approval, manufacture and commercialization of our drug candidates, both of which are in the early stages of development.

We have no products approved for sale. Our lead drug candidate, Sarconeos (BIO101), is in clinical development and our second drug candidate, Macuneos (BIO201) is still in the preclinical phase. Our life-cycle extension drug candidates, BIO103 and BIO203, are still in the preclinical development phase. To secure marketing approval for our lead drug candidates, we will need to meet endpoints satisfactory to the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or FDA, and European Medicines Agency, or EMA, in larger confirmatory clinical trials. The success of our business, including our ability to finance our company and generate any revenue in the future, will primarily depend on the successful development, regulatory approval and commercialization of drug candidates. However, given our early stage of development, it may be many years, if we succeed at all, before we have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of a drug candidate sufficient to warrant approval for commercialization.

In the future, we may also become dependent on other drug candidates that we may develop or acquire. The clinical and commercial success of our current drug candidates and any future drug candidates will depend on a number of factors, including the following:

These factors, many of which are beyond our control, could cause us to experience significant delays or an inability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize or license our drug candidates. Even if regulatory approvals are obtained, we may never be able to successfully commercialize or license any of our drug candidates. Accordingly, we cannot provide assurances that we will be able to generate sufficient revenue through the sale of our drug candidates or any future drug candidates we may develop to continue our business or achieve profitability.

We may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates under applicable regulatory requirements. The denial, delay or imposed limitations of or on any such approval would preclude, delay or limit the commercialization of our drug candidates and adversely impact our potential to generate revenue and/or raise financing, our business and our results of operations.

To gain approval to market our drug candidates, we must provide the FDA, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities with clinical data that adequately demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the drug candidate for the intended indication applied for in the applicable regulatory filing. It is not currently known what effect, if any, modification of ongoing non-COVID-19 related studies resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic, will have on the acceptability of data from such revised studies. Product development is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage of any of our clinical development programs. A number of companies in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after promising data in preclinical studies or earlier phase clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, new preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events. Success in preclinical testing and early phase clinical trials does not ensure that later phase clinical trials will be successful, and the results of clinical trials conducted by other parties may not be indicative of the results in trials we may conduct.

The research, testing, manufacturing, packaging, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of drug and biologic products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities, and such regulations differ from country to country. We are not permitted to market our investigational drug candidates in the EU, the United States or any other country until they receive the requisite approval from the applicable regulatory authorities of such jurisdictions.

Separately, in response to the global pandemic of COVID-19, on March 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to postpone most foreign inspections of manufacturing facilities and products through April 2020. Subsequently, on July 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to resume certain on-site inspections of domestic manufacturing facilities subject to a risk-based prioritization system. The FDA intends to use this risk-based assessment system to identify the categories of regulatory actitivty that can occur within a given geographic area, ranging from mission-critical inspections to resumption of all regulatory activities. With the second wave of COVID-19, if global health concerns prevent the FDA, EMA and other foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, EMA or other foreign regulatory authorities to timely review and process regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

The FDA, EMA or any foreign regulatory authorities can delay, limit or deny approval of our drug candidates for many reasons, including:

In addition, the legal and regulatory basis for expedited and emergency programs related to COVID-19 may be revoked and withdrawn if the public health assessment warrants the removal of the pandemic and emergency status.

Of the large number of biotechnology and pharmaceutical products in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the applicable regulatory approval processes and are commercialized.

Even if we eventually complete clinical testing and receive approval from the FDA, EMA or applicable foreign authorities for any of our drug candidates, the applicable agency may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly additional clinical trials, which may be required after approval. The FDA, EMA or the applicable foreign regulatory agency also may approve our drug candidates for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested, and the applicable agency, may not approve our drug candidates with the labeling that we believe is necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of such drug candidates.

Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approval would delay or prevent commercialization of our drug candidates and would materially adversely impact our business and prospects.

Clinical development is a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results.

Clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure or delay can occur at any time during the different phases, or stages, of the clinical trial process. Success in preclinical studies and early clinical trials does not ensure that later clinical trials will be successful. A number of companies in the biotechnology, biopharmaceutical and pharmaceutical industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical trials, even after positive results in earlier preclinical studies or earlier phase clinical trials. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, new preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway and safety or efficacy observations made in clinical trials, including previously unreported adverse events. The results of our preclinical studies or in vivo and in vitro studies provide very limited data in diseases whose physiopathology is not well understood and may not be predictive of the results of study outcomes in human clinical trials. Drug candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired pharmacological properties or safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical studies and early phase clinical trials. Notwithstanding any promising results in earlier studies, we cannot be certain that we will not face setbacks and receive less promising results in later studies. Even if we are able to initiate and complete clinical trials, including studies underway during the initial coronavirus pandemic, the safety and efficacy data may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates. 

We may experience delays in obtaining the necessary regulatory authorization for our MYODA and COVA clinical program of Sarconeos (BIO101) and/or our MACA clinical trial program for Macuneos (BIO201), completing our SARA-INT Phase 2 clinical trial of Sarconeos (BIO101), and initiating other planned studies and trials. Additionally, we cannot be certain that studies or trials for our drug candidates will begin on time, not require redesign, enroll an adequate number of subjects on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. Clinical trials can be delayed or terminated for a variety of reasons, including delays or failures related to:

We may experience numerous adverse or unforeseen events during, or as a result of, preclinical studies and clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize our drug candidates, including:

If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our drug candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our drug candidates or other testing, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only moderately positive or if there are safety concerns, we may:

We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board, or DSMB, for such trial or by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may suspend or terminate a clinical trial due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial.

Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, as well as political and economic risks relevant to such foreign countries, including foreign countries’ enforcement of COVID-19 restrictions on movement and lifestyle.

Principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and may receive cash or equity compensation in connection with such services. If these relationships and any related compensation result in perceived or actual conflicts of interest, or a regulatory authority concludes that the financial relationship may have affected the interpretation of the trial, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site may be questioned and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized, which could result in the delay or rejection of the marketing application we submit. Any such delay or rejection could prevent or delay us from commercializing our current or future drug candidates.

If we experience delays in the completion, or termination, of any preclinical study or clinical trial of our drug candidates, the commercial prospects of our drug candidates may be harmed, and our ability to generate revenues from any of these drug candidates will be delayed or not realized at all. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials may increase our costs, slow down our drug candidate development and approval process and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our products and generate revenues. Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. 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 drug candidates. If one or more of our drug candidates prove to be ineffective, unsafe or commercially unviable, our entire platform and pipeline would have little, if any, value, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

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

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

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

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

Our drug candidates may cause 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 marketing approval, if any.

Undesirable side effects caused by our drug candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt clinical trials and could result in a more restrictive label or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. For example, one of our drug products, Sarconeos (BIO101), has been identified as having potential for misuse/abuse of the intended anabolic effect by body builders and sportsmen. Participants in clinical studies with Sarconeos (BIO101) are advised not to allow anyone access to the trial medication and the investigators specifically instruct subjects not to share their medicine. This risk is likely to become more significant after marketing authorization is granted, and the label for the drug, if it becomes approved, may have warnings and restrictions on the use and distribution of the product.

If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our drug candidates, we, the FDA, EMA, the IRBs at the institutions in which our studies are conducted, or the DSMB could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA, EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our drug candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete any of our clinical trials or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. Failure to recognize or manage the potential side effects of our drug candidates could result in patient injury. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

If our drug candidates are used in combination with other drugs or treatments, they may interact negatively with those other drugs or treatments. We plan to conduct studies in order to assess the risks of interactions of our drug candidates with other drugs and treatments taken together. However, there can be no guarantee that our drug candidates will not interact negatively with other drugs or treatments not covered by our studies or that such interactions will not be revealed until after the products have been commercialized. These interactions could have adverse, unacceptable or undetected side effects, or could reduce or destroy the effectiveness of our drug candidates, which could diminish the commercial potential of our drug candidates, slow their development and consequently, have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and prospects.

Even if we successfully advance any of our drug candidates into and through clinical trials, such trials will likely only include a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure to our drug candidates. As a result, we cannot be assured that adverse effects of our drug candidates will not be uncovered when a significantly larger number of patients are exposed to the drug candidate. Further, any clinical trials may not be sufficient to determine the effect and safety consequences of taking our drug candidates over a multi-year period. Certain clinical trial protocols that are revised because of the current COVID-19 pandemic may also make it more difficult to identify potential safety concerns early on.

If any of our drug candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

Any of the foregoing events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular drug candidate, if approved, and result in the loss of significant revenues to us, which would materially and adversely affect our results of operations and business. In addition, if one or more of our drug candidates prove to be unsafe, our entire platform and pipeline could be affected, which would have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Even if our current drug candidates or any future drug candidates obtain regulatory approval, they may fail to achieve the broad degree of physician and patient adoption and use necessary for commercial success.

Even if one or more of our drug candidates receives the necessary regulatory approvals, the commercial success of any of our current or future drug candidates will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by physicians and patients for approved indications. Our drug candidates may not be commercially successful. For a variety of reasons, including among other things, competitive factors, pricing or physician preference, reimbursement by insurers, the degree and rate of physician and patient adoption of our current or future drug candidates, if approved, will depend on a number of factors, including:

We cannot assure you that our current or future drug candidates, if approved, will achieve broad market acceptance among physicians and patients. Any failure by our drug candidates that obtain regulatory approval to achieve market acceptance or commercial success would adversely affect our results of operations.

We rely on third parties to provide the raw materials necessary for our drug candidates and to manufacture preclinical and clinical supplies of our drug candidates and we intend to rely on third parties to produce commercial supplies of any approved drug candidate. The loss of these suppliers or manufacturers, or their failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or to provide us with sufficient quantities at acceptable quality levels or prices, or at all, would materially and adversely affect our business.

We do not have nor do we plan to build or acquire the infrastructure or capability internally to source the raw materials necessary to produce our drug candidates and/or to manufacture our drug candidates on a preclinical, clinical or commercial scale.

Sarconeos (BIO101) is a pharmaceutical-grade purification of 20-hydroxyecdysone, which is derived from the Cyamnotis sp or Stemmacantha sp, a plant cultivated in China and used for medicinal purposes in traditional Chinese medicine. There are a limited number of growers of this plant and suppliers of the plant material and we must account for the lead time required to grow sufficient quantities of the plant to meet our needs. At this time we rely on one supplier for the plant quantities we require for our clinical trials. We have not entered into a long-term supply agreement with this supplier. We have already obtained good manufacturing practices, or GMP, batches/GMP-compliant batches/batches produced in compliance with GMP of Sarconeos (BIO101) for our ongoing SARA-INT Phase 2 and COVA Phase 2/3 clinical trials and we believe we can secure sufficient quantities for our SARA, COVA and MYODA clinical programs through our current supply chain up to regulatory approval and/or marketing authorization. If our current supplier is unable to provide sufficient quantities of the plant to produce Sarconeos (BIO101) for future clinical trials, our ability to obtain regulatory approval for Sarconeos (BIO101) would be affected. If we receive regulatory approval, we will likely need substantial quantities of plants to produce Sarconeos (BIO101) for commercial development. If our current supplier is unable to provide sufficient quantities of the plant to produce Sarconeos (BIO101) and if we are unable to find an alternative source, our ability to commercialize Sarconeos (BIO101) would be impaired. In order to address this issue, we are evaluating alternative methods for producing 20-hydroxyecdysone in order to optimize the supply chain to support our projected commercial needs. 

Macuneos (BIO201) is a pharmaceutical-grade purification of norbixin, which is derived from seeds of Bixa orellana L., a plant traditionally used for medicinal purposes in the Amazon and currently used for producing a food color in many countries. Although this plant is more widely available, there are a limited number of suppliers of the plant material that could meet our requirement for quality. At this time we rely on one supplier for the plant quantities we will require for our MACA clinical program. We have not entered into a long-term supply agreement with this supplier. If our current supplier is unable to provide sufficient supply to produce Macuneos (BIO201) for future clinical trials, our ability to obtain regulatory approval Macuneos (BIO201) would be affected. If we receive regulatory approval, we will likely need substantial quantities of plants to produce Macuneos (BIO201) for commercial development. If our current supplier is unable to provide sufficient quantities of the plant to produce Macuneos (BIO201) and if we are unable to find an alternative source, our ability to commercialize Macuneos (BIO201) would be impaired. In order to address this issue, we are evaluating alternative methods for producing norbixin in order to optimize the supply chain to support our projected commercial needs.

Our contract manufacturing partner for both Sarconeos (BIO101) and Macuneos (BIO201) is Patheon, a part of Thermo Fisher Scientific, located in Germany. We have not entered into a long-term manufacturing agreement with Patheon or any other contract manufacturer.

The facilities used by our contract manufacturer to manufacture our drug candidates are subject to various regulatory requirements and may be subject to the inspection of the FDA, EMA or other regulatory authorities. We do not control the manufacturing process of, and are completely dependent on, our contract manufacturing partner for compliance with the regulatory requirements, known as cGMPs. If our contract manufacturer cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, EMA or comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions, we may not be able to rely on their manufacturing facilities for the manufacture of our drug candidates. In addition, we have limited control over the ability of our contract manufacturer to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA, EMA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority finds these facilities inadequate for the manufacture of our drug candidates or if such facilities are subject to enforcement action in the future or are otherwise inadequate, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our drug candidates. Any significant delay in, or quality control problems with respect to, the supply of a drug candidate, or the raw material components thereof, for an ongoing study or trial could considerably delay completion of our preclinical studies or future clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our drug candidates. Moreover, quarantines, shutdowns, shelter-in-place and other restrictions related to COVID-19 or other infectious diseases, or the perception that such events, orders or other restrictions on the conduct of business operations could occur, could impact personnel at manufacturing facilities which could disrupt our supply chain.

If any of our drug candidates is approved by the FDA, EMA and/or comparable foreign regulatory authorities and we choose to independently commercialize such drug candidate, we will need to engage manufacturers for the commercial supply of such drug candidates. However, we may be unable to enter into any such agreement or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could have a material adverse impact upon our business. Moreover, if there is a disruption to one or more of our third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ relevant operations, or if we are unable to enter into arrangements for the commercial supply of our drug candidates, we will have no other means of producing our drug candidates until they restore the affected facilities or we or they procure alternative manufacturing facilities or sources of supply. Our ability to progress our preclinical and clinical programs could be materially and adversely impacted if any of the third party suppliers upon which we rely were to experience a significant business challenge, disruption or failure due to issues such as financial difficulties or bankruptcy, issues relating to other customers such as regulatory or quality compliance issues, or other financial, legal, regulatory or reputational issues. Additionally, any damage to or destruction of our third-party manufacturers’ or suppliers’ facilities or equipment may significantly impair our ability to manufacture our drug candidates on a timely basis.

In addition, to manufacture our drug candidates in the quantities that we believe would be required to meet anticipated market demand, our third-party manufacturers would likely need to increase manufacturing capacity and, in some cases, we could be required to secure alternative sources of commercial supply, which could involve significant challenges and could require additional regulatory approvals. COVID-19 restrictions create a risk that we may not be able to develop or scale up manufacturing capacity on a timely basis or have access to logistics or supply channels. In addition, the development of commercial-scale manufacturing capabilities could require us and our third-party manufacturers to invest substantial additional funds and hire and retain the technical personnel who have the necessary manufacturing experience. Neither we nor our third-party manufacturers may successfully complete any required increase to existing manufacturing capacity in a timely manner, or at all. If our manufacturers or we are unable to purchase the raw materials necessary for the manufacture of our drug candidates on acceptable terms, at sufficient quality levels, or in adequate quantities, if at all, the commercial launch of our drug candidates or any future drug candidates would be delayed or there would be a shortage in supply, which would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of such drug candidates, if approved.

We rely on third parties in the conduct of all of our preclinical studies and clinical trials and intend to rely on third parties in the conduct of all of our future clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or meet expected deadlines, we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates.

We currently do not have the ability to independently conduct preclinical studies that comply with the regulatory requirements known as good laboratory practice, or GLP, requirements. We also do not currently have the ability to independently conduct any clinical trials. The FDA, EMA and regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions require us to comply with regulations and standards, commonly referred to as good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements for conducting, monitoring, recording and reporting the results of clinical trials, in order to ensure that the data and results are scientifically credible and accurate and that the trial subjects are adequately informed of the potential risks of participating in clinical trials. We rely on medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories and other third parties, such as CROs to conduct GLP-compliant preclinical studies and GCP-compliant clinical trials on our drug candidates properly and on time. While we have agreements governing their activities, we control only certain aspects of their activities and have limited influence over their actual performance. The third parties with whom we contract for execution of our GLP-compliant preclinical studies and our GCP-compliant clinical studies play a significant role in the conduct of these studies and trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. These third parties are not our employees and, except for restrictions imposed by our contracts with such third parties, we have limited ability to control the amount or timing of resources that they devote to our programs. In addition, third parties may have proprietary COVID-19 policies that may create delays or service disruptions, including a temporary work-from-home policy that leads to reduced workforce productivity. Although we rely on these third parties to conduct our GLP-compliant preclinical studies and GCP-compliant clinical trials, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our GLP preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its investigational plan and protocol and applicable laws and regulations, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

Many of the third parties with whom we contract may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other drug development activities that could harm our competitive position. If the third parties conducting our preclinical studies or our clinical trials do not adequately perform their contractual duties or obligations, experience significant business challenges, disruptions or failures, do not meet expected deadlines, terminate their agreements with us or need to be replaced, or if the quality or accuracy of the data they obtain is compromised due to their failure to adhere to our protocols or to GCPs, or for any other reason, we may need to enter into new arrangements with alternative third parties. This could be difficult, costly or impossible, and our preclinical studies or clinical trials may need to be extended, delayed, terminated or repeated. As a result we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval in a timely fashion, or at all, for the applicable drug candidate, our financial results and the commercial prospects for our drug candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.

We face significant competition in an environment of rapid technological and scientific change, and our drug candidates, if approved, will face significant competition and our failure to effectively compete may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration. A number of our competitors have significantly greater resources than we do and we may not be able to successfully compete.

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries in particular are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on developing proprietary therapeutics. Numerous companies are engaged in the development, patenting, manufacturing and marketing of healthcare products competitive with those that we are developing. We face competition from a number of sources, such as pharmaceutical companies, generic drug companies, biotechnology companies and academic and research institutions, many of which have greater financial resources, marketing capabilities, sales forces, manufacturing capabilities, research and development capabilities, clinical trial expertise, intellectual property portfolios, experience in obtaining patents and regulatory approvals for drug candidates and other resources than we do. Some of the companies that offer competing products also have a broad range of other product offerings, large direct sales forces and long-term customer relationships with our target physicians, which could inhibit our market penetration efforts. Mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. In addition, certain of our drug candidates, if approved, may compete with other products that treat age-related diseases, including over-the-counter, or OTC, treatments, for a share of some patients’ discretionary budgets and for physicians’ attention within their clinical practices.

We are aware of other companies seeking to develop treatments to prevent or treat aging-related diseases through various biological pathways. For sarcopenia, Sarconeos (BIO101) is currently the most advanced in clinical development given the recent failures of myostatin inhibitors (the last of these is bimagrumab, which was developed by Novartis and has failed in Phase 2 clinical studies). Indeed, the main challenge is to be able to identify the optimal target population given the dynamics in diagnostic criteria. The recent failures, combined with these dynamics, can deter major pharmaceutical companies from re-entering this space. While there are numerous clinical studies with new drug candidates to treat COVID-19, we believe Sarconeos (BIO101) is the most advanced drug candidate for the treatment of respiratory failure associated with COVID-19, specifically targeting the RAS imbalanced by SARS-CoV-2.

For DMD, our current focus on non-ambulatory patients with evidence of respiratory deterioration, puts us in a position to become one of the more advanced companies that develop medications for this population. Santhera Therapeutics, which was developing idebenone for this indication, has recently stopped their Phase 2/3 study and are no longer investing in this area. For dry AMD, we believe that we will compete with a number of companies that are developing drugs to treat this disease, for example, Allegro Ophthalmics, Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Astellas, Hemera Biosciences, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Sarepta Therapeutics, Ophthotech Corporation and Roche and Stealth Biotherapeutics.

Certain alternative treatments offered by competitors may be available at lower prices and may offer greater efficacy or better safety profiles. Furthermore, currently approved products could be discovered to have application for treatment of age-related diseases generally, which could give such products significant regulatory and market timing advantages over any of our drug candidates. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours and may obtain orphan product exclusivity from the FDA or EMA for indications our drug candidates are targeting, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Newly developed systemic or non-systemic treatments that replace existing therapies that are currently only utilized in patients suffering from severe disease may also have lessened side effects or reduced prices compared to current therapies, which make them more attractive for patients suffering from mild to moderate disease. Even if a generic product or an OTC product is less effective than our drug candidates, a less effective generic or OTC product may be more quickly adopted by physicians and patients than our competing drug candidates based upon cost or convenience. For additional information regarding our competition, see the section of this annual report titled “Business—Competition.”

In addition, another party may be successful in producing a more efficacious therapy for COVID-19 or a therapy with a more convenient or preferred route of administration or in producing a therapy in a more timely manner, which may lead to the diversion of funding away from us and toward other companies or lead to decreased demand for our potential therapies. Further, other therapies that are more affordable than our potential therapies may be used to treat COVID-19, including existing generic drugs, which could also hurt the funding of and demand for our potential therapies.

Several public and private entities have been working to develop a therapy or vaccine for COVID-19 including: BioNTech SE (together with Pfizer Inc.), Johnson & Johnson and Moderna, Inc., whose COVID-19 vaccines have been authorized for emergency use, and Alexion Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Incyte Corporation, Sanofi S.A., Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Amgen Inc. (together with Adaptive Biotechnologies Corporation), Abcellera Biologics, Inc. (together with Eli Lilly and Company), Vir Biotenchonogy, Inc. (together with GSK, Biogen Inc. and WuXi Biologics Ltd.), Altimmune, Inc., AstraZeneca PLC (together with Oxford University), GlaxoSmithKline (GSK) (together with Sanofi S.A.), Hear Biologics, Inc., Inovio Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Novavax, Inc. and Vaxart, Inc., among others, who are still in the development stage. These entities may be more successful at developing, manufacturing or commercializing a therapy for COVID-19, especially given that several of these other organizations are much larger than we are and have access to larger pools of capital, including U.S. government funding, and broader manufacturing infrastructure. The success or failure of other entities, or perceived success or failure, may adversely impact our ability to obtain any future funding for our development and manufacturing efforts or to ultimately commercialize a therapy for COVID-19, if approved.

Government restrictions on pricing and reimbursement, as well as other healthcare payor cost-containment initiatives, may negatively impact our ability to generate revenues and become profitable even if we obtain regulatory approval to market a product.

Our ability to commercialize any products successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, determine which medications they will cover and establish reimbursement levels. Assuming we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. Patients who are prescribed medications for the treatment of their conditions, and their prescribing physicians, generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the costs associated with their prescription drugs. Patients are unlikely to use our products unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover all or a significant portion of the cost of our products. Therefore, coverage and adequate reimbursement is critical to new product acceptance. Coverage decisions may depend upon clinical and economic standards that disfavor new drug products when more established or lower cost therapeutic alternatives are already available or subsequently become available.

Government authorities and other third-party payors are developing increasingly sophisticated methods of controlling healthcare costs, such as by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices as a condition of coverage, are using restrictive formularies and preferred drug lists to leverage greater discounts in competitive classes, and are challenging the prices charged for medical products.

In the United States, federal programs impose penalties on drug manufacturers in the form of mandatory additional rebates and/or discounts if commercial prices increase at a rate greater than the Consumer Price Index-Urban, and these rebates and/or discounts, which can be substantial, may impact our ability to raise commercial prices. Further, no uniform policy requirement for coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists among third-party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for drug products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance.

In the European Union, or EU, coverage and reimbursement possibilities for drug products differ from one Member State to another. Each Member State has the ability to set the prices and restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement. Factors contributing to price changes between Member States depend on different regulatory approaches and instruments used by each Member State to govern the supply and demand of medicinal products. For example, in France, a pharmaceutical company may freely set a price of a drug after obtaining the National MA. However, in order for the product to be reimbursed under the French Social Security scheme, the pharmaceutical company must follow a specific process and submit an application to the French High Authority for Health, or HAS. The opinion issued by the HAS is then transmitted to the French Economic Committee for Health Products, or CEPS—with which the pharmaceutical company has to negotiate the price of the product. The final decision on reimbursement is issued by the French Minister of Health and can be revised afterwards depending on the cost/benefit balance of the medicinal product over time. Other EU countries may adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. In view of these differences from one Member State to another, there is still a risk that some EU countries do not allow favorable reimbursements and pricing arrangements.

The continuing efforts of governments, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare costs to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may negatively affect our commercialization prospects, including:

We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement will be available for any potential drug candidate that we may commercialize and, if reimbursement is available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage and reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any drug candidate for which we obtain marketing approval. If coverage and reimbursement are not available or reimbursement is available only to limited levels, we may not successfully commercialize any drug candidate for which we obtain marketing approval.

We expect that additional U.S. state and federal healthcare reform measures, as well as similar measures by non-U.S. governments, will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in additional pricing pressure or reduced demand for any drug candidate we develop. For example, it is possible that additional governmental action (both in the United States and abroad) will be taken to address the COVID-19 pandemic, which could impact our business in an as-yet unknown manner.

In the event we elect to commercialize any of our drug candidates that receive regulatory approval, we will need to establish sales capabilities on our own or through third parties. If we are unsuccessful in our efforts, we may not be able to market and sell our drug candidates effectively in the United States, EU and/or other foreign jurisdictions, if approved, or generate product revenue.

We currently do not have a marketing or sales organization. In order to commercialize our drug candidates in the United States and foreign jurisdictions, we would need to establish marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services, and we may not be successful in doing so. If any of our drug candidates receive regulatory approval and we elect to independently commercialize such drug candidates, we would expect to establish a sales organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize each such drug candidate, which would be expensive and time consuming. We have no prior experience in the marketing, sale and distribution of pharmaceutical products and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain, and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel, and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. Alternatively, we may choose to collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. If we are unable to enter into such arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our drug candidates. If we are not successful in commercializing our drug candidates or any future drug candidates, either on our own or through arrangements with one or more third parties, and are not otherwise able to license these products to third parties, we may not be able to generate any future product revenue and we would incur significant additional losses.

We will need to increase the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing growth.

As of the date of this annual report, we have 25 full-time employees, 20 of whom are engaged in research and development activities and four of whom are engaged in general and administrative activities. We will need to continue to expand our managerial, operational, finance and other resources in order to manage our operations and clinical trials, continue our development activities and commercialize our drug candidates or any future drug candidates. Our management and personnel, systems and facilities currently in place may not be adequate to support this future growth. Our need to effectively execute our growth strategy requires that we:

If we fail to attract and retain senior management and key scientific personnel, we may be unable to successfully develop our drug candidates or any future drug candidates, conduct our clinical trials and commercialize our current or any future drug candidates.

We are dependent upon the services of our senior management and the loss of any of these individuals could harm our business. The loss of services of any of our key executive officers or other members of our senior management team, may be disruptive to, or cause uncertainty in, our business and could have a negative impact on our ability to manage and grow our business effectively. Such disruption could have a material adverse impact on our financial performance, financial condition, and the market price of our ordinary shares.

Our success also depends on our ability to continue to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified clinical and scientific personnel. Competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and pharmaceuticals field is intense due to the limited number of individuals who possess the skills and experience required by our industry. We will need to hire additional personnel as we expand our clinical development and if we initiate commercial activities. We may not be able to attract and retain quality personnel on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, to the extent we hire personnel from competitors, we may be subject to allegations that they have been improperly solicited or that they have divulged proprietary or other confidential information, or that their former employers own their research output.

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

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

Our inability to obtain and maintain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost and scope of coverage to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of our current or any future drug candidates we develop. We currently carry product liability insurance covering our clinical trials. Although we maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies also have various exclusions and deductibles, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We will have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient funds to pay such amounts. Moreover, in the future, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses. If and when we obtain approval for marketing any of our drug candidates, we intend to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of such drug candidate; however, we may be unable to obtain this liability insurance on commercially reasonable terms or at all.

Our existing collaborations as well as additional collaboration arrangements that we may enter into in the future may not be successful, which could adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our drug candidates.

We utilize external collaborations and currently maintain several active early-stage research and discovery focused collaborations. We may seek to partner with pharmaceutical laboratories to conduct clinical trials of our drug candidates. We may also seek additional collaboration arrangements for the commercialization, or potentially for the development, of certain of our drug candidates depending on the merits of retaining commercialization rights for ourselves as compared to entering into collaboration arrangements. To the extent that we decide to enter into additional collaboration agreements in the future, we may face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators. Moreover, collaboration arrangements are complex and time-consuming to negotiate, document, implement and maintain and challenging to manage. We may not be successful in our efforts to prudently manage our existing collaborations or to enter new ones should we choose to do so. The terms of new collaborations or other arrangements that we may establish may not be favorable to us.

The success of our collaboration arrangements will depend heavily on the efforts and activities of our collaborators. Collaborations are subject to numerous risks, which may include risks that:

Significant disruptions of information technology systems or breaches of data security could materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

We collect and maintain information in digital form that is necessary to conduct our business, and we are increasingly dependent on information technology systems and infrastructure to operate our business. In the ordinary course of our business, we collect, store and transmit large amounts of confidential information, including intellectual property, proprietary business information and personal information. It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of such confidential information. We have established physical, electronic and organizational measures to safeguard and secure our systems to prevent a data compromise, and rely on commercially available systems, software, tools, and monitoring to provide security for our information technology systems and the processing, transmission and storage of digital information. We have also outsourced elements of our information technology infrastructure, and as a result a number of third-party vendors may or could have access to our confidential information. Our internal information technology systems and infrastructure, and those of our current and any future collaborators, contractors and consultants and other third parties on which we rely, are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, malware, natural disasters, terrorism, war, telecommunication and electrical failures, cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusions over the Internet, attachments to emails, persons inside our organization, or persons with access to systems inside our organization.

The risk of a security breach or disruption, particularly through cyber-attacks or cyber-intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments and cyber-terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. In addition, the prevalent use of mobile devices that access confidential information increases the risk of data security breaches, which could lead to the loss of confidential information or other intellectual property. The costs to us to mitigate network security problems, bugs, viruses, worms, malicious software programs and security vulnerabilities could be significant, and while we have implemented security measures to protect our data security and information technology systems, our efforts to address these problems may not be successful, and these problems could result in unexpected interruptions, delays, cessation of service and other harm to our business and our competitive position. If such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our operations, it could result in a material disruption of our product development programs. For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed or ongoing or planned clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. Moreover, if a computer security breach affects our systems or results in the unauthorized release of personally identifiable information, our reputation could be materially damaged.

In addition, such a breach may require notification to governmental agencies, the media or individuals pursuant to various federal and state privacy and security laws, if applicable, including the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Clinical Health Act of 2009, and its implementing rules and regulations, as well as regulations promulgated by the Federal Trade Commission and state breach notification laws.

Under the data protection laws in the EU, and notably the General Data Protection Regulation, or GDPR, No. 2016/679, which entered into force on May 25, 2018 and is applicable personal data that we process in relation to our presence in the EU, the offering of products or services to individuals in the EU or the monitoring of the behavior of individuals in the EU, we have also a legal responsibility to report personal data breaches to the competent supervisory authority. The GDPR includes a broad definition and a short deadline for the notification of personal data breaches, which may be difficult to implement in practice and requires that we implement robust internal processes. Under the GDPR, we have to report personal data breaches to the competent supervisory authority within 72 hours of the time we become aware of a breach “unless the personal data breach is unlikely to result in a risk to the right and freedoms of natural persons” (Article 33 of the GDPR). In addition, the GDPR requires that we communicate the breach to the data subject if the breach is “likely to result in a high risk to the rights and freedoms of natural persons” (Article 34 of the GDPR). In order to fulfil these requirements, we have to implement specific internal processes to be followed in case of a personal data breach, which will allow us to (a) contain and recover the breach, (b) assess the risk to the data subjects, (c) notify, and possibly communicate the breach to the data subjects, (d) investigate and respond to the breach. The performance of these processes involve substantial costs in resources and time. 

Finally, as a consequence of the decision by the European Court of Justice issued on July 16, 2020 (known as the “Schrems II decision”), which invalidated the privacy shield for data transfers between the EU and the United States, a reassessment of both data transfers to and storage of EU data by our U.S. entities or other U.S. companies will be required. To the extent that the U.S. legal system is not considered as providing an adequate level of protection by the European authorities, and that the other safeguards provided by applicable regulation (e.g., Standard Contractual Clause, or SCCs, in their current form) are not deemed to fully address such inadequacies, additional protective measures will have to be assessed on a case-by-case basis, and implemented in order to ensure the compliance of such transfers, based on the new SCCs currently under discussion, prior to adoption.

Moreover, as we may rely on third parties that will also process as processor the data for which we are a data controller—for example, in the context of the manufacturing of our drug candidates or for the conduct of clinical trials, we must contractually ensure that strict security measures, as well as appropriate obligations including an obligation to report in due delay any security incident are implemented, in order to allow us fulfilling our own regulatory requirements.

We would also be exposed to a risk of loss or litigation and potential liability for any security breach on personal data for which we are data controller. The costs of above-mentioned processes together with legal penalties, possible compensation for damages and any resulting lawsuits arising from a breach may be extensive and may have a negative impact on reputation and materially adversely affect our business, results of operations and financial condition.

Our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, consultants, commercial collaborators, service providers and other vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements, which could have an adverse effect on our results of operations.

We are exposed to the risk that our employees and independent contractors, including principal investigators, consultants, any future commercial collaborators, service providers and other vendors may engage in misconduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or other unauthorized activities that violate the laws and regulations of the FDA, EMA and other similar regulatory authorities, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such regulatory authorities; manufacturing standards; healthcare fraud and abuse, data privacy laws and other similar laws; or laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. Activities subject to these laws also involve the improper use or misrepresentation of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, the creation of fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials, or illegal misappropriation of product, which could result in regulatory sanctions and cause serious harm to our reputation. 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. In addition, 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 and financial results, including, without limitation, the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, disgorgements, possible exclusion from participation in governmental healthcare programs, individual imprisonment, other sanctions, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Our business involves the use of hazardous materials and we and our third-party manufacturers and suppliers must comply with environmental laws and regulations, which can be expensive and restrict how we do business.

Our research and development activities and our third-party manufacturers’ and suppliers’ activities involve the controlled storage, use and disposal of hazardous materials owned by us, including the components of our product and drug candidates and other hazardous compounds. We and any third-party manufacturers and suppliers we engage are subject to numerous federal, state and local environmental, health and safety laws, regulations and permitting requirements, including those governing laboratory procedures; the generation, handling, use, storage, treatment, and disposal of hazardous and regulated materials and wastes; the emission and discharge of hazardous materials into the ground, air and water; and employee health and safety. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste. In some cases, these hazardous materials and various wastes resulting from their use are stored at our and our manufacturers’ facilities pending their use and disposal. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination, which could cause an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts and business operations, environmental damage resulting in costly clean-up and liabilities under applicable laws and regulations governing the use, storage, handling and disposal of these materials and specified waste products.

Although we believe that the safety procedures utilized by our third-party manufacturers for handling and disposing of these materials generally comply with the standards prescribed by these laws and regulations, we cannot guarantee that this is the case or eliminate the risk of accidental contamination or injury from these materials. Under certain environmental laws, we could be held responsible for costs relating to any contamination at our current or past facilities and at third-party facilities. In such an event, we may be held liable for any resulting damages and such liability could exceed our resources and state or federal or other applicable authorities may curtail our use of certain materials and/or interrupt our business operations. Furthermore, environmental laws and regulations are complex, change frequently and have tended to become more stringent. We cannot predict the impact of such changes and cannot be certain of our future compliance. 

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

Risks Related to Intellectual Property

Our ability to compete may decline if we do not adequately protect our proprietary rights.

Our success depends on obtaining and maintaining proprietary rights to our drug candidates for the treatment of age-related diseases, as well as successfully defending these rights against third-party challenges. We will only be able to protect our drug candidates, and their uses from unauthorized use by third parties to the extent that valid and enforceable patents, or effectively protected trade secrets, cover them. Our ability to obtain patent protection for our drug candidates is uncertain due to a number of factors, including:

Even if we have or obtain patents covering our drug candidates or compositions, we may still be barred from making, using and selling our drug candidates or technologies because of the patent rights of others. Others may have filed, and in the future may file, patent applications covering compositions or products that are similar or identical to ours. There are many issued U.S. and foreign patents relating to chemical compounds and therapeutic products, and some of these relate to compounds we intend to commercialize. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by others exist in the allergy treatment field in which we are developing products. These could materially affect our ability to develop our drug candidates or sell our products if approved. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending applications unknown to us that may later result in issued patents that our drug candidates or compositions may infringe. These patent applications may have priority over patent applications filed by us.

Obtaining and maintaining a patent portfolio entails significant expense and resources. Part of the expense includes periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees, various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications due in several stages over the lifetime of patents and/or applications, as well as the cost associated with complying with numerous procedural provisions during the patent application process. We may or may not choose to pursue or maintain protection for particular inventions. In addition, there are situations in which failure to make certain payments or noncompliance with certain requirements in the patent process can result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. If we choose to forgo patent protection or allow a patent application or patent to lapse purposefully or inadvertently, our competitive position could suffer.  

In addition, it is unclear at this time what Brexit’s impact will have on our intellectual property rights and the process for obtaining and defending such rights. It is possible that certain intellectual property rights, such as trademarks, granted by the EU will cease being enforceable in the UK absent special arrangements to the contrary. With regard to existing patent rights, the effect of Brexit should be minimal considering enforceable patent rights are specific to the UK, whether arising out of the European Patent Office or directly through the UK patent office.

Legal actions to enforce our proprietary rights (including patents and trademarks) can be expensive and may involve the diversion of significant management time. In addition, these legal actions could be unsuccessful and could also result in the invalidation of our patents or trademarks or a finding that they are unenforceable. We may or may not choose to pursue litigation or other actions against those that have infringed on our patents or trademarks, or used them without authorization, due to the associated expense and time commitment of monitoring these activities. If we fail to protect or to enforce our intellectual property rights successfully, our competitive position could suffer, which could harm our results of operations.

Biotechnology patents and patent applications involve highly complex legal and factual questions, which, if determined adversely to us, could negatively impact our patent position.

The patent positions of biotechnology companies can be highly uncertain and involve complex legal and factual questions. The interpretation and breadth of claims allowed in some patents covering biotechnology compositions may be uncertain and difficult to determine, and are often affected materially by the facts and circumstances that pertain to the patented compositions and the related patent claims. The standards of the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, are sometimes uncertain and could change in the future. Consequently, the issuance and scope of patents cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, invalidated or circumvented. U.S. patents and patent applications may also be subject to interference proceedings, and U.S. patents may be subject to reexamination proceedings, post-grant review and/or inter partes review in the USPTO. Foreign patents may be subject also to opposition or comparable proceedings in the corresponding foreign patent office, which could result in either loss of the patent or denial of the patent application or loss or reduction in the scope of one or more of the claims of the patent or patent application. For example, Patent No. EP2790706 (protecting Patent family S3 in various European countries) is currently subject to an opposition procedure before the European Patent Office. A decision, which is susceptible to lead to the cancellation of Patent No. EP2790706, is expected in 2021-2022, it being specified that the Chinese patent protecting the same invention (Patent family S3) was invalidated by the Court of Revision of the Chinese Patent Office, further to a motion for invalidation brought by a third party based on similar arguments (including the insufficient description of the animal model used in the patent, the novelty of the patent, the extension beyond the application as filed and the inventive step). In addition, such interference, reexamination, post-grant review, inter partes review and opposition proceedings may be costly. Accordingly, rights under any issued patents may not provide us with sufficient protection against competitive products or processes.

In addition, changes in or different interpretations of patent laws in the United States and foreign countries may permit others to use our discoveries or to develop and commercialize our technology and products without providing any compensation to us, or may limit the number of patents or claims we can obtain. The laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as U.S. laws and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for defending our intellectual property rights. This may also result in having the same invention covering differing claims in different countries and provide a different scope of protection in foreign countries.

If we fail to obtain and maintain patent protection and trade secret protection of our drug candidates, we could lose our competitive advantage and competition we face would increase, reducing any potential revenues and adversely affecting our ability to attain or maintain profitability.

Developments in patent law could have a negative impact on our business.

From time to time, the United States Supreme Court, or the Supreme Court, other federal courts, the United States Congress, the USPTO or similar foreign authorities may change the standards of patentability and any such changes could have a negative impact on our business.

In addition, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the America Invents Act, which was signed into law in 2011, includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These changes include a transition from a “first-to-invent” system to a “first-to-file” system, changes to the way issued patents are challenged, and changes to the way patent applications are disputed during the examination process. These changes may favor larger and more established companies that have greater resources to devote to patent application filing and prosecution. The USPTO has developed new and untested regulations and procedures to govern the full implementation of the America Invents Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the America Invents Act, and, in particular, the first-to-file provisions, became effective on March 16, 2013. Substantive changes to patent law associated with the America Invents Act may affect our ability to obtain patents, and if obtained, to enforce or defend them. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the America Invents Act will have on the cost of prosecuting our patent applications, our ability to obtain patents based on our discoveries and our ability to enforce or defend any patents that may issue from our patent applications, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business. 

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

In addition to patent protection, because we operate in the highly technical field of development of therapies, we rely in part on trade secret protection in order to protect our proprietary technology and processes. However, trade secrets are difficult to protect. We expect to enter into confidentiality and intellectual property assignment agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers, and other advisors. These agreements generally require that the other party keep confidential and not disclose to third parties all confidential information developed by the party or made known to the party by us during the course of the party’s relationship with us. These agreements also generally provide that inventions conceived by the party in the course of rendering services to us will be our exclusive property. However, these agreements may not be honored and may not effectively assign intellectual property rights to us. 

In addition to contractual measures, we try to protect the confidential nature of our proprietary information using physical and technological security measures. Such measures may not, for example, in the case of misappropriation of a trade secret by an employee or third party with authorized access, provide adequate protection for our proprietary information. Our security measures may not prevent an employee or consultant from misappropriating our trade secrets and providing them to a competitor, and recourse we take against such misconduct may not provide an adequate remedy to protect our interests fully. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret can be difficult, expensive, and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, courts outside the United States may be less willing to protect trade secrets. Trade secrets may be independently developed by others in a manner that could prevent legal recourse by us. If any of our confidential or proprietary information, such as our trade secrets, were to be disclosed or misappropriated, or if any such information was independently developed by a competitor, our competitive position could be harmed.

We will not seek to protect our intellectual property rights in all jurisdictions throughout the world and we may not be able to adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the jurisdictions where we seek protection.

Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on our drug candidates and our trademarks in all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States could be less extensive than those in the United States, assuming that rights are obtained in the United States. 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 United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions or using our trademarks in all countries outside the United States, or from selling or importing products made using our inventions or commercialized under identical or similar trademarks in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. The statutory deadlines for pursuing patent and trademark protection in individual foreign jurisdictions are based on the priority dates of each of our patent and trademark applications.

Competitors may use our technologies or trademarks in jurisdictions where we do not pursue and obtain patent or trademark protection to develop their own products and further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent or trademark protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our products and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. Even if we pursue and obtain issued patents and trademarks in particular jurisdictions, our patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent third parties from so competing.

The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries, particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, especially those relating to biopharmaceuticals or biotechnologies. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents, if obtained, or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. For example, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties, provided that (as a general rule and subject to local laws) the interests of public health so require (e.g., if the treatment is made available to the public in insufficient quantity or quality or at abnormally high prices) and the patent owner is compensated. If the test of the safety and efficacy of Sarconeos (BIO101) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia is successful, we could be required to grant compulsory licenses for any patent or patent application protecting such treatment. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government authorities or government contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no benefit. Patent protection must ultimately be sought on a country-by-country basis, which is an expensive and time-consuming process with uncertain outcomes. Accordingly, we may choose not to seek patent protection in certain countries, and we will not have the benefit of patent protection in such countries. 

Proceedings to enforce our patent or other 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 or other intellectual property at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent or trademark 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. In addition, changes in the law and legal decisions by courts in the United States and foreign countries may affect our ability to obtain adequate protection for our technology and the enforcement of intellectual property. 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.

Third parties may assert ownership or commercial rights to inventions we develop.

Third parties may in the future make claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our intellectual property. We have written agreements with collaborators that provide for the ownership of intellectual property arising from our collaborations. These agreements provide that we must negotiate certain commercial rights with collaborators with respect to joint inventions or inventions made by our collaborators that arise from the results of the collaboration. In some instances, there may not be adequate written provisions to address clearly the resolution of intellectual property rights that may arise from a collaboration. If we cannot successfully negotiate sufficient ownership and commercial rights to the inventions that result from our use of a third-party collaborator’s materials where required, or if disputes otherwise arise with respect to the intellectual property developed with the use of a collaborator’s samples, we may be limited in our ability to capitalize on the market potential of these inventions. In addition, we may face claims by third parties that our agreements with employees, contractors, or consultants obligating them to assign intellectual property to us are ineffective, or in conflict with prior or competing contractual obligations of assignment, which could result in ownership disputes regarding intellectual property we have developed or will develop and interfere with our ability to capture the commercial value of such inventions. Litigation may be necessary to resolve an ownership dispute, and if we are not successful, we may be precluded from using certain intellectual property, or may lose our exclusive rights in that intellectual property. Either outcome could have an adverse impact on our business.

Our Chief Executive Officer, who is a corporate officer (mandataire social) but not an employee of the Company under French law, is involved in our research and development activities. He has contributed to research results for which we have submitted patent applications in which he is listed as a co-inventor and other inventions that we expect may give rise to patent applications in the future for which we expect he will be included as a co-inventor. Under French intellectual property law, inventors who are employees of a company have legal rights that are typically circumscribed in France by a combination of French labor law and contractual arrangements. Because Mr. Veillet is our CEO, and not an employee, we have entered into an assignment agreement with him, pursuant to which he will be entitled to certain payments as consideration for his prior and future contributions to our research projects and inventions. See “Intellectual Property Agreement with Stanislas Veillet” in the “Business” section of this annual report for additional information.

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

We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we try to ensure that our employees and consultants do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of a former employer or other third parties. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. 

A dispute concerning the infringement or misappropriation of our proprietary rights or the proprietary rights of others could be time-consuming and costly, and an unfavorable outcome could harm our business.

There is significant litigation in the biotechnology industry regarding patent and other intellectual property rights. While we are not currently subject to any pending intellectual property litigation, and are not aware of any such threatened litigation, we may be exposed to future litigation by third parties based on claims that our drug candidates, technologies or activities infringe the intellectual property rights of others. If our development activities are found to infringe any such patents, we may have to pay significant damages or seek licenses to such patents. A patentee could prevent us from using the patented drugs or compositions. We may need to resort to litigation to enforce a patent issued to us, to protect our trade secrets, or to determine the scope and validity of third-party proprietary rights. From time to time, we may hire scientific personnel or consultants formerly employed by other companies involved in one or more areas similar to the activities conducted by us. Either we or these individuals may be subject to allegations of trade secret misappropriation or other similar claims as a result of prior affiliations. If we become involved in litigation, it could consume a substantial portion of our managerial and financial resources, regardless of whether we win or lose. We may not be able to afford the costs of litigation. Any adverse ruling or perception of an adverse ruling in defending ourselves against these claims could have a material adverse impact on our cash position and the price of the ADSs. Any legal action against us or our collaborators could lead to:

We may infringe the intellectual property rights of others, which may prevent or delay our product development efforts and stop us from commercializing or increase the costs of commercializing our drug candidates, if approved.

Our success will depend in part on our ability to operate without infringing the intellectual property and proprietary rights of third parties. We cannot assure you that our business, products and methods do not or will not infringe the patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties.

The biotechnology industry is characterized by extensive litigation regarding patents and other intellectual property rights. Other parties may allege that our drug candidates or the use of our technologies infringes patent claims or other intellectual property rights held by them or that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Patent and other types of intellectual property litigation can involve complex factual and legal questions, and their outcome is uncertain. Any claim relating to intellectual property infringement that is successfully asserted against us may require us to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorney’s fees if we are found to be willfully infringing another party’s patents, for past use of the asserted intellectual property and royalties and other consideration going forward if we are forced to take a license. In addition, if any such claim were successfully asserted against us and we could not obtain such a license, we may be forced to stop or delay developing, manufacturing, selling or otherwise commercializing products.

Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management time and attention in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court, or redesign our products. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, intellectual property litigation or claims could force us to do one or more of the following:

Any of these risks coming to fruition could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects.

Issued patents covering our drug candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court.

If we or one of our licensing partners initiated legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering our drug candidate, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our drug candidate is invalid and/or unenforceable. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include alleged failures to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness or non-enablement. Grounds for unenforceability assertions include allegations 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 administrative bodies in the United States or abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, post grant review and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions, e.g., opposition proceedings. Such proceedings could result in revocation or amendment of our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our drug candidates or competitive products. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to validity, 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 and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our drug candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business. 

Risks Related to Government Regulation

While a key component of our strategy is achieving an EUA in the United States and conditional marketing authorization in the EU and other countries, the likelihood to be considered for such programs depends on the status of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Currently, there are a few vaccines in the world authorized for use against SARS-CoV-2. If vaccines become readily available and very efficient, the number of cases will drop significantly and the urgency to develop new treatments will be reduced. Under such conditions, regulatory agencies may be less willing to consider expedited and shortened processes for review and may require submissions to be based on more than one clinical study.

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a drug candidate, our products will remain subject to regulatory scrutiny.

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

Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA, EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any approved marketing application. Inspections by regulatory authorities and the potential need for subsequent corrective actions may require additional investment or changes to our manufacturing or suppliers’ manufacturing facilities, and may cause delays, interruptions, or complete stoppage of the manufacturing process. If certain drugs have a potential for misuse/abuse, manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities must also comply with certain drug diversion regulatory and compliance programs. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money, and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production, and quality control.

Given that we expect to have a global supply chain, our supply chain may also be affected by the FDA’s enforcement activity at the U.S. border, such as import detentions, drug diversion oversight or refusals. Despite our investment in regulatory compliance, the FDA may raise issues with our regulatory compliance, and suppliers outside of our direct control may also fail to adhere to the FDA’s regulatory requirements, in which case our supply chain and business plans may be interrupted. Further import detentions or holds may also occur while the FDA attempts to verify the imported products’ compliance with the law. Such detentions or holds may affect our supply chain and business plans.

Authorities and policy makers are tightening controls on compliance by suppliers on environmental and social standards. We may be required to further tighten the audit of our suppliers, and to change suppliers in case of non-compliance. Independently, enforcement measures by government authorities such as import bans from suppliers suspected of such non-compliance may impact our supply chain.

We will have to comply with requirements concerning advertising and promotion for our products. Promotional communications with respect to prescription drugs and biologics are subject to a variety of legal and regulatory restrictions in the United States and the EU (both at EU and national level, for instances, in France) and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved label. As such, we may not promote our products for indications or uses for which they do not have approval. The holder of an approved application must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process. We could also be asked to conduct post-marketing clinical trials to verify the safety and efficacy of our products in general or in specific patient subsets. An unsuccessful post-marketing study or failure to complete such a study could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval. In addition, under European regulation, certain of our drug candidates could be added to the list of drugs subject to additional monitoring. Such list concerns drugs for which there is no experience due to their recent marketing or a lack of data on their long-term use. This classification would lead to additional requirements regarding post-marketing surveillance measures of our products, which may require more resources on our end. 

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

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

Moreover, the policies of the FDA, EMA and of other regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our drug candidates. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, in Europe, the United States or elsewhere. For example, the new European regulation on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use published in the Official Journal of the European Union on May 27, 2014 will soon be applicable, upon the implementation of the European portal and database and could impact the administrative procedure that we will have to follow in order to obtain regulatory approval for our drug candidates. Depending on the date of our application for clinical trial authorization, we could be required to adapt quickly to the new requirements and procedures resulting from this new regulation, in particular regarding the new required deadlines that will require us to be reactive in the event of additional requests from the authorities. We are also anticipating further guidance from national regulators of Member States (such as ANSM for France) as those are involved in the process.

In addition, certain policies of the new Biden administration in the United States may impact our business and industry. Previously, the Trump administration enacted several executive actions, including the issuance of a number of Executive Orders, that restricted the FDA’s ability to engage in routine oversight activities such as implementing statutes through rulemaking. The Biden administration rescinded some of the Executive Orders, but it may also implement new policies and executive actions that could affect the FDA’s ability to exercise its authority. If these executive actions impose restrictions on the FDA’s ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted. In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

If any of our drug candidates obtain regulatory approval, additional competitors could enter the market with generic versions of such drugs, which may result in a material decline in sales of affected products.

Under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, or the Hatch-Waxman Act, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an abbreviated new drug application, or ANDA, seeking approval of a generic version of an approved, small molecule innovator product. Under the Hatch-Waxman Act, a manufacturer may also submit a new drug application, or NDA, under section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, that references the FDA’s prior approval of the innovator product. A 505(b)(2) NDA product may be for a new or improved version of the original innovator product. The Hatch-Waxman Act also provides for certain periods of regulatory exclusivity, which preclude FDA approval (or in some circumstances, FDA filing and review) of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA. In addition to the benefits of regulatory exclusivity, an innovator NDA holder may have patents claiming the active ingredient, product formulation or an approved use of the drug, which would be listed with the product in the FDA publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” known as the Orange Book. If there are patents listed in the Orange Book for a product, a generic or 505(b)(2) applicant that seeks to market its product before expiration of the patents must include in their applications what is known as a “Paragraph IV” certification, challenging the validity or enforceability of, or claiming non-infringement of, the listed patent or patents. Notice of the certification must be given to the patent owner and NDA holder and if, within 45 days of receiving notice, either the patent owner or NDA holder sues for patent infringement, approval of the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA is stayed for up to 30 months. 

Accordingly, if any of our drug candidates are approved, competitors could file ANDAs for generic versions of our drug candidates or 505(b)(2) NDAs that reference our small molecule drug products. If there are patents listed for our drug candidates in the Orange Book, those ANDAs and 505(b)(2) NDAs would be required to include a certification as to each listed patent indicating whether the ANDA applicant does or does not intend to challenge the patent. We cannot predict which, if any, patents in our current portfolio or patents we may obtain in the future will be eligible for listing in the Orange Book, how any generic competitor would address such patents, whether we would sue on any such patents, or the outcome of any such suit.

We may not be successful in securing or maintaining proprietary patent protection for products and technologies we develop or license. Moreover, if any of our owned or in-licensed patents that are listed in the Orange Book are successfully challenged by way of a Paragraph IV certification and subsequent litigation, the affected product could immediately face generic competition and its sales would likely decline rapidly and materially.

We may seek orphan drug designation for certain future drug candidates, but we may be unable to obtain such designations or to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including market exclusivity, which may cause our revenue, if any, to be reduced.

We may pursue orphan drug designation for certain of our future drug candidates. In the European Union, the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, or COMP, recommends orphan drug designation to promote the development of products that are intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition affecting not more than five in 10,000 persons in the European Union. Additionally, designation is granted for products intended for the diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of a life-threatening, seriously debilitating or serious and chronic condition when, without incentives, it is unlikely that sales of the drug in the European Union would be sufficient to justify the necessary investment in developing the drug or biological product or where there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment, or, if such a method exists, the medicine must be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug or biologic product as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States.

In the European Union, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug or biological product approval. This period may be reduced to six years if the orphan drug designation criteria are no longer met, including where it is shown that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages, and application fee waivers. In addition, if a product receives the first FDA approval for the indication for which it has orphan designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means the FDA may not approve any other application to market the same drug for the same indication for a period of seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority over the product with orphan exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity for the orphan patient population.

Even if we obtain orphan drug designation, we may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Further, even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a drug candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active moieties can be approved for the same condition. Orphan drug designations are not in any way indicative of a drug’s likelihood of receiving the final marketing authorization from FDA. The FDA does not evaluate a drug candidate’s safety and effectiveness using the same standard as it would when reviewing a drug candidate’s safety and effectiveness prior to granting final marketing approvals. The FDA may grant orphan drug designations to multiple drugs intended for the same indication. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the EMA or FDA can subsequently approve the same drug with the same active moiety for the same condition if the EMA or FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug or biologic nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. 

Enacted and future healthcare legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our drug candidates and may affect the prices we may set.

In the United States, the EU and other jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes to the healthcare system that could affect our future results of operations. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively the Affordable Care Act, was enacted, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act, those of greatest importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries include the following:

Since its enactment, there have been judicial and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act, and we expect there will be additional challenges and amendments to the Affordable Care Act in the future.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. In August 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, led to aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year. These reductions went into effect in April 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2025 unless additional action is taken by Congress. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. 

Individual states in the United States have also become 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. Legally-mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities 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. This could reduce the ultimate demand for our drug candidates or put pressure on our product pricing. Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. In addition, recently there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products.

In the EU, similar political, economic and regulatory developments may affect our ability to profitably commercialize our drug candidates, if approved. In addition to continuing pressure on prices and cost containment measures, legislative developments at the EU or at the Member State level may result in significant additional requirements or obstacles that may increase our operating costs. The delivery of healthcare in the EU, including the establishment and operation of health services and the pricing and reimbursement of medicines, is almost exclusively a matter for national, rather than EU, law and policy. National governments and health service providers have different priorities and approaches to the delivery of health care and the pricing and reimbursement of products in that context. In general, however, the healthcare budgetary constraints in most EU member states have resulted in restrictions on the pricing and reimbursement of medicines by relevant health service providers. Generally, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take many months after the receipt of regulatory approval and product launch. In some EU Member States, such as in France, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial that compares the cost-effectiveness of our products candidates with available therapies in order to obtain favorable reimbursement for the indications sought or pricing approval. Should reimbursement for our drug candidates be unavailable in any country in which we seek reimbursement, or be limited or subject to additional clinical trials, or should pricing be set at unsatisfactory levels, then this might have an impact on our operating results. Coupled with ever-increasing EU and national regulatory burdens on those wishing to develop and market products, this could prevent or delay marketing approval of our drug candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to commercialize our drug candidates, if approved. In markets outside of the United States and EU, reimbursement and healthcare payment systems vary significantly by country, and many countries have instituted price ceilings on specific products and therapies.

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action in the United States, the EU or any other jurisdiction. If we or any third parties we may engage are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we or such third parties are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our drug candidates may lose any regulatory approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers will be subject to applicable healthcare regulatory laws, which could expose us to penalties.

Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers, may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, market, sell and distribute our drug candidates, if approved. Such laws 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 government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly, time-consuming and may require significant 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.

In addition, considering that our activity involves the processing of EU personal data, in particular sensitive data such as health data, our business activities are also subject to GDPR and other national data protection laws and guidelines with respect to such data, which implies that we must implement significant and continuous efforts to comply with these data protection regulations, as well as any applicable additional national health care regulations. The GDPR has allowed EU Member States to introduce additional requirements for the processing of health data. This means we must comply with both EU as well as national laws in order to conduct our activities as regards patient data. In particular, our GDPR compliance involves the precise identification of our data processing operations and the risks incurred, the implementation of an organization of our internal processes and the establishment of documentation relating to our compliance. Our GDPR compliance also means being very aware of the fulfilment of our third-party contractors’ obligations and their own GPDR compliance, which requires us to impose strict contractual provisions on our third-party contractors as processors. Moreover, the transfer of data from the EU to our U.S. entities or others U.S. companies must be subject to a valid legal mechanism for the lawful transfer of data, which may have to require some of our third-party contractors who process personal data to take additional privacy and security measures. Non-compliance could cause us to incur potential disruption and expense related to our business processes. Any violations of these laws and regulations could also result in substantial penalties and could materially damage our reputation.

Furthermore, following the ECJ’s decision to invalidate the EU—U.S. Privacy Shield as part of the Schrems II decision, any transfer or storage of EU data by our U.S. entities, other U.S. companies or contractual counterparties will require the implementation of additional safeguards, which given the current status of regulations, will most certainly require further protection measures in order to ensure an adequate level of protection as defined by the EU and national authorities.

We are subject to U.S. and foreign anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws with respect to our operations and non-compliance with such laws can subject us to criminal and/or civil liability and harm our business.

We are subject to the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, as amended, or the FCPA, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, the USA PATRIOT Act, and possibly other state and national anti-bribery and anti-money laundering laws in countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, third-party intermediaries, joint venture partners and collaborators from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or benefits to recipients in the public or private sector. We engage third-party investigators, CROs, and other consultants to design and perform preclinical studies of our drug candidates, and will do the same for any clinical trials. Also, once a drug candidate has been approved and commercialized, we may engage third-party intermediaries to promote and sell our products abroad and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, and other regulatory approvals. We or our third-party intermediaries may have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or state-owned or affiliated entities. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of these third-party intermediaries, our employees, representatives, contractors, collaborators, partners, and agents, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities.

Noncompliance with anti-corruption and anti-money laundering laws could subject us to whistleblower complaints, investigations, sanctions, settlements, prosecution, other enforcement actions, disgorgement of profits, significant fines, damages, other civil and criminal penalties or injunctions, suspension and/or debarment from contracting with certain persons, the loss of export privileges, reputational harm, adverse media coverage, and other collateral consequences. If any subpoenas, investigations, or other enforcement actions are launched, or governmental or other sanctions are imposed, or if we do not prevail in any possible civil or criminal litigation, our business, results of operations and financial condition could be materially harmed. In addition, responding to any action will likely result in a materially significant diversion of management’s attention and resources and significant defense and compliance costs and other professional fees. In certain cases, enforcement authorities may even cause us to appoint an independent compliance monitor which can result in added costs and administrative burdens.

Our failure to maintain certain tax benefits applicable to French technology companies may adversely affect our results of operations.

As a French biotechnology company, we have benefited from certain tax advantages, including, for example, the research tax credit (Crédit d’Impôt Recherche), or CIR. The CIR is a French tax credit aimed at stimulating research and development. The CIR can be offset against French corporate income tax due and the portion in excess (if any) may be refunded at the end of a three fiscal-year period (or, sooner, for smaller companies such as ours). The CIR is calculated based on our claimed amount of eligible research and development expenditures in France and represented €3.1 million, €2.8 million and €3.3million as of December 31, 2018, 2019 and 2020, respectively. The French tax authority with the assistance of the Research and Technology Ministry may audit each research and development program in respect of which a CIR benefit has been claimed and assess whether such program qualifies in its view for the CIR benefit. The French tax authorities may challenge our eligibility to, or our calculation of certain tax reductions and/or deductions in respect of our research and development activities and, should the French tax authorities be successful, we may be liable for additional corporate income tax, and penalties and interest related thereto, or we may not obtain the refunds for which we have applied, which could have a significant impact on our results of operations and future cash flows. Furthermore, if the French Parliament decides to eliminate, or reduce the scope or the rate of, the CIR benefit, either of which it could decide to do at any time, our results of operations could be adversely affected.

Recent U.S. tax legislation and future changes to applicable U.S. tax laws and regulations may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Changes in laws and policy relating to taxes may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. For example, at the end of 2017, the U.S. government enacted significant tax reform, with additional guidance from the U.S. tax authority still pending. Changes include, but are not limited to, a federal corporate tax rate decrease to 21% for tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, a reduction to the maximum deduction allowed for net operating losses generated in tax years after December 31, 2017, eliminating carrybacks of net operating losses, and providing for indefinite carryforwards for losses generated in tax years after December 31, 2017. The 2017 legislation remains unclear in many respects and could be subject to potential amendments and technical corrections or even outright changes, particularly as a possible new U.S. presidential administration and a new U.S. Congress prepares to drive U.S. federal income tax policy starting in 2021. Additionally, current tax laws may continue to be subject to interpretations and implementing regulations by the Treasury and Internal Revenue Service, or IRS, any of which could mitigate or increase certain adverse effects of prior legislation. In addition, it is unclear how future U.S. federal income tax changes will affect state and local taxation. Generally, future changes in applicable U.S. tax laws and regulations, or their interpretation and application could have an adverse effect on our business, financial conditions and results of operations.

Risks Related to the Ownership of the ADSs and Ordinary Shares and Our Status as a Non-U.S. Company with Foreign Private Issuer Status

The requirements of being a U.S. public company may strain our resources, divert management’s attention and affect our ability to attract and retain executive management and qualified board members.

As a U.S. public company, we will incur legal, accounting, and other expenses that we did not previously incur. Following our initial public offering of ADSs in the United States, we are now subject to the Exchange Act, including the reporting requirements thereunder, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, the Nasdaq listing requirements and other applicable securities rules and regulations. Compliance with these rules and regulations will increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some activities more difficult, time-consuming or costly and increase demand on our systems and resources, particularly after we are no longer an “emerging growth company” and/or a foreign private issuer. For example, for so long as we remain a foreign private issuer, we will not be required to file with the SEC quarterly reports with respect to our business and results of operations, which are required to be made by domestic issuers pursuant to the Exchange Act.

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, we will be required to furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting, including an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. However, while we remain an emerging growth company, we will not be required to include this attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. When our independent registered public accounting firm is required to undertake an assessment of our internal control over financial reporting, the cost of complying with Section 404 will significantly increase and management’s attention may be diverted from other business concerns, which could adversely affect our business and results of operations. We may need to hire more employees in the future or engage outside consultants to comply with these requirements, which will further increase our cost and expense. If we fail to implement the requirements of Section 404 in the required timeframe, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, including the SEC and the Nasdaq. Furthermore, if we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, we could lose investor confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of the ADSs and our ordinary shares could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities. Failure to implement or maintain effective internal control systems required of public companies could also restrict our future access to the capital markets. 

In addition, enhanced legal and regulatory regimes and heightened standards relating to corporate governance and disclosure for public companies result in increased legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time consuming. Further, being a U.S. public company and a French public company will have an impact on disclosure of information and require compliance with two sets of applicable rules. This could result in uncertainty regarding compliance matters and higher costs necessitated by legal analysis of dual legal regimes, ongoing revisions to disclosure and adherence to heightened governance practices.

The Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, is currently unable to inspect the audit work and practices of auditors operating in France, including our auditor.

Our auditor, Ernst & Young et Autres, is registered with the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board, or PCAOB, in the United States. The PCAOB’s cooperative arrangement with the French audit authority expired in December 2019. The expiration of this cooperation arrangement prevents inspections of registered firms in France until a new arrangement is concluded. Such inspections assess a registered firm’s compliance with U.S. law and professional standards in connection with the performance of audits of financial statements filed with the SEC. As a result, our investors may not realize the potential benefits of such inspections until a new cooperative arrangement, which is currently under negotiation, is entered into and inspections in France resume. The current inability of the PCAOB to conduct inspections of auditors in France also makes it more difficult to evaluate the effectiveness of our auditor’s audit procedures or quality control procedures as compared to auditors outside France that are subject to PCAOB inspections.

There was no public market for the ADSs prior to our U.S. initial public offering, and an active market may not develop in which investors can resell their ADSs.

Prior to our U.S. initial public offering, there was no public market for the ADSs. We cannot predict the extent to which an active trading market for the ADSs will develop or be sustained after the offering, or how the development of such a market might affect the market price for the ADSs. The initial public offering price of the ADSs in the offering was agreed upon between us and the underwriter based on a number of factors, including the trading price of our ordinary shares on the Euronext Growth Paris market, as well as certain market conditions in effect at the time of the offering, which may not be indicative of the price at which the ADSs will trade in the future. Investors may not be able to sell their ADSs at or above the price they paid. In addition, investors may not be able to successfully withdraw the underlying ordinary shares of the ADSs for the reasons discussed under the risk factor titled “You may not be able to exercise your right to vote the underlying ordinary shares of the ADSs” described below. In connection with any withdrawal of any of our ordinary shares represented by ADSs, the ADSs will be surrendered to the depositary. Unless additional ADSs are issued, the effect of such transactions will be to reduce the number of outstanding ADSs and, if a significant number of transactions are effected, to reduce the liquidity of the ADSs.

The market price of our equity securities may be volatile, and purchasers of our securities could incur substantial losses.

The market price for our securities may be volatile. The stock market in general and the market for biotechnology companies in particular have experienced extreme volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of particular companies. As a result of this volatility, investors may not be able to sell their securities at or above the price paid for the security. The market price for our securities may be influenced by many factors, including:

These and other market and industry factors may cause the market price and demand for our securities to fluctuate substantially, regardless of our actual operating performance, which may limit or prevent investors from readily selling their securities and may otherwise negatively affect the liquidity of the trading market for our securities.

We may be exposed to significant foreign exchange risk. Exchange rate fluctuations may adversely affect the foreign currency value of the ADSs.

We incur portions of our expenses and may in the future derive revenues in currencies other than the euro, in particular, the U.S. dollar. As a result, we are exposed to foreign currency exchange risk as our results of operations and cash flows are subject to fluctuations in foreign currency exchange rates. We currently do not engage in hedging transactions to protect against uncertainty in future exchange rates between particular foreign currencies and the euro. Therefore, for example, an increase in the value of the euro against the U.S. dollar could be expected to have a negative impact on our revenue and earnings growth as U.S. dollar revenue and earnings, if any, would be translated into euros at a reduced value. We cannot predict the impact of foreign currency fluctuations, and foreign currency fluctuations in the future may adversely affect our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. The ADSs will be quoted in U.S. dollars on the Nasdaq Capital Market and our ordinary shares are trading in euros on the Euronext Growth Paris. Our financial statements are prepared in euros. Fluctuations in the exchange rate between euros and the U.S. dollar will affect, among other matters, the U.S. dollar value of the ADSs.

If we do not achieve our projected development and commercialization goals in the timeframes we announce and expect, our business will be harmed and the price of our securities could decline as a result.

We sometimes estimate for planning purposes the timing of the accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development objectives. These milestones may include our expectations regarding the commencement or completion of scientific studies, clinical trials, the submission of regulatory filings, or commercialization objectives. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones, such as the completion of an ongoing clinical trial, the initiation of other clinical programs, receipt of marketing approval, or a commercial launch of a product. The achievement of many of these milestones may be outside of our control. All of these milestones are based on a variety of assumptions which may cause the timing of achievement of the milestones to vary considerably from our estimates, including:

If we fail to achieve announced milestones in the timeframes we expect, the commercialization of our drug candidates may be delayed, our business and results of operations may be harmed, and the trading price of our securities may decline as a result. 

We may be at an increased risk of securities class action litigation following our U.S. initial public offering.

Historically, securities class action litigation has often been brought against a company following a decline in the market price of its securities. This risk is especially relevant for us because biotechnology and biopharmaceutical companies have experienced significant share price volatility in recent years. If we were to be sued, it could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources, which could harm our business.

We have broad discretion in the use of the net proceeds from our initial public offering in the United States and may use them in ways with which you do not agree and in ways that may not increase the value of your investment.

Our management has broad discretion to apply the net proceeds that we received from our initial public offering in the United States. We may spend or invest these proceeds in a way with which our shareholders and ADS holders disagree. The failure by our management to apply these funds effectively could harm our business and financial condition. Pending their use, we may invest the net proceeds from the offering in a manner that does not produce income or that loses value. These investments may not yield a favorable return to our investors.

If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of the ADSs and their trading volume could decline.

The trading market for the ADSs depends in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If no or few securities or industry analysts cover our company, the trading price for the ADSs would be negatively impacted. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our equity securities or publishes incorrect or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our securities would likely decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, or downgrades our securities, demand for our securities could decrease, which could cause the price of the ADSs or their trading volume to decline.

We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our ordinary shares and, consequently, your ability to achieve a return on your investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our securities. In addition, French law may limit the amount of dividends we are able to distribute.

We have never declared or paid any cash dividends on our ordinary shares and do not currently intend to do so for the foreseeable future. We currently intend to invest our future earnings, if any, to fund our growth. Therefore, you are not likely to receive any dividends on our securities for the foreseeable future and the success of an investment in these securities will depend upon any future appreciation in their value. Consequently, investors may need to sell all or part of their holdings after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any future gains on their investment. There is no guarantee that our securities will appreciate in value or even maintain the price at which investors have purchased them. Investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our securities.

Further, under French law, the determination of whether we have been sufficiently profitable to pay dividends is made on the basis of our statutory financial statements prepared and presented in accordance with accounting standards applicable in France. Article 34 of our By-laws imposes additional limitations on our ability to declare and pay dividends and there may be taxes imposed on you if we elect to pay a dividend. Therefore, we may be more restricted in our ability to declare dividends than companies not based in France.

In addition, exchange rate fluctuations may affect the amount of euros that we are able to distribute, and the amount in U.S. dollars that our shareholders receive upon the payment of cash dividends or other distributions we declare and pay in euros, if any. These factors could harm the value of the ADSs, and, in turn, the U.S. dollar proceeds that holders receive from the sale of the ADSs.

We have a significant number of outstanding warrants and convertible debt instruments, which may cause significant dilution to our shareholders, have a material adverse impact on the market price of our ordinary shares and make it more difficult for us to raise funds through future equity offerings.

As of February 26, 2021, we had 113,134,307 ordinary shares issued and outstanding. In addition, as of that date we had outstanding warrants to acquire up to 8,153,563 ordinary shares and 2,500,911 free ordinary shares that were granted to our two founders on December 22, 2020 and will be delivered to them on December 22, 2022 after a two-year vesting period. The issuance of ordinary shares upon the exercise of warrants and convertible debt instruments would dilute the percentage ownership interest of all shareholders, might dilute the book value per share of our ordinary shares and would increase the number of our publicly traded shares, which could depress the market price of our ordinary shares. 

We are also subject to outstanding legal proceeding instigated by NEGMA Group Limited, or NEGMA, in which they have claimed 7,000,000 ordinary shares should be issued to them. See the section of this annual report titled “Business—Legal Proceedings.”

In addition to the dilutive effects described above, the perceived risk of dilution as a result of the significant number of outstanding warrants and convertible debt may cause our shareholders to be more inclined to sell their shares, which would contribute to a downward movement in the price of our ordinary shares. Moreover, the perceived risk of dilution and the resulting downward pressure on our share price could encourage investors to engage in short sales of our ordinary shares, which could further contribute to price declines in our ordinary shares. The fact that our shareholders, warrant holders and convertible debt holders can sell substantial amounts of our ordinary shares in the public market, whether or not sales have occurred or are occurring could make it more difficult for us to raise additional funds through the sale of equity or equity-related securities in the future at a time and price that we deem reasonable or appropriate, or at all.

Future sales, or the possibility of future sales, of a substantial number of the ADSs or our ordinary shares could adversely affect the price of the ADSs.

Future sales of a substantial number of the ADSs or ordinary shares, or the perception that such sales will occur, could cause a decline in the market price of the ADSs. ADSs sold in our U.S. initial public offering may be resold in the public market without restriction, unless purchased by our affiliates. If ADS holders sell substantial amounts of ADSs in the public market, or the market perceives that such sales may occur, the market price of the ADSs and our ability to raise capital through an issuance of equity securities in the future could be adversely affected.

Approximately 5.4% of our ordinary shares are currently subject to lock-up agreements entered into in connection with our U.S. initial public offering. If, after the expiration of such lock-up agreements, these shareholders sell substantial amounts of our ordinary shares in the public market, or the market perceives that such sales may occur, the market price of our securities could be adversely affected.

The rights of shareholders in companies subject to French corporate law differ in material respects from the rights of shareholders of corporations incorporated in the United States.

We are a French company with limited liability. Our corporate affairs are governed by our bylaws and by the laws governing companies incorporated in France. The rights of shareholders and the responsibilities of members of our board of directors are in many ways different from the rights and obligations of shareholders in companies governed by the laws of U.S. jurisdictions. For example, in the performance of its duties, our board of directors is required by French law to consider the interests of our company, rather than solely our shareholders and/or creditors. It is possible that some of these parties will have interests that are different from, or in addition to, yours.

U.S. investors may have difficulty enforcing civil liabilities against our company and directors and senior management and the experts named in this annual report.

Certain members of our board of directors and senior management and certain experts named in this annual report are non-residents of the United States, and all or a substantial portion of our assets and the assets of such persons are located outside the United States. As a result, it may not be possible to serve process on such persons or us in the United States or to enforce judgments obtained in U.S. courts against them or us based on civil liability provisions of the securities laws of the United States. Additionally, it may be difficult to assert U.S. securities law claims in actions originally instituted outside of the United States. Foreign courts may refuse to hear a U.S. securities law claim because foreign courts may not be the most appropriate forums in which to bring such a claim. Even if a foreign court agrees to hear a claim, it may determine that the law of the jurisdiction in which the foreign court resides, and not U.S. law, is applicable to the claim. Further, if U.S. law is found to be applicable, the content of applicable U.S. law must be proved as a fact, which can be a time-consuming and costly process, and certain matters of procedure would still be governed by the law of the jurisdiction in which the foreign court resides. In particular, there is some doubt as to whether French courts would recognize and enforce certain civil liabilities under U.S. securities laws in original actions or judgments of U.S. courts based upon these civil liability provisions. In addition, awards of punitive damages in actions brought in the United States or elsewhere may be unenforceable in France. An award for monetary damages under the U.S. securities laws would be considered punitive if it does not seek to compensate the claimant for loss or damage suffered but is intended to punish the defendant. French law provides that a shareholder, or a group of shareholders, may initiate a legal action to seek indemnification from the directors of a corporation in the corporation’s interest if it fails to bring such legal action itself. If so, any damages awarded by the court are paid to the corporation and any legal fees relating to such action may be borne by the relevant shareholder or the group of shareholders. 

The enforceability of any judgment in France will depend on the particular facts of the case as well as the laws and treaties in effect at the time. The United States and France do not currently have a treaty providing for recognition and enforcement of judgments (other than arbitration awards) in civil and commercial matters.

ADSs holders may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to claims arising under the deposit agreement, which could result in less favorable outcomes to the plaintiff(s) in any such action.

The deposit agreement governing the ADSs representing our ordinary shares provides that, to the fullest extent permitted by law, ADS holders waive the right to a jury trial of any claim they may have against us or the depositary arising out of or relating to our shares, the ADSs or the deposit agreement, including any claim under the U.S. federal securities laws.

If we or the depositary opposed a jury trial demand based on the waiver, the court would determine whether the waiver was enforceable based on the facts and circumstances of that case in accordance with the applicable state and federal law. To our knowledge, the enforceability of a contractual pre-dispute jury trial waiver in connection with claims arising under the federal securities laws has not been finally adjudicated by the United States Supreme Court. However, we believe that a contractual pre-dispute jury trial waiver provision is generally enforceable, including under the laws of the State of New York, which govern the deposit agreement, by a federal or state court in the City of New York, which has non-exclusive jurisdiction over matters arising under the deposit agreement. In determining whether to enforce a contractual pre-dispute jury trial waiver provision, courts will generally consider whether a party knowingly, intelligently and voluntarily waived the right to a jury trial. We believe that this is the case with respect to the deposit agreement and the ADSs. In addition, New York courts will not enforce a jury trial waiver provision in order to bar a viable setoff or counterclaim sounding in fraud or one which is based upon a creditor’s negligence in failing to liquidate collateral upon a guarantor’s demand, or in the case of an intentional tort claim (as opposed to a contract dispute), none of which we believe are applicable in the case of the deposit agreement or the ADSs. It is advisable that you consult legal counsel regarding the jury waiver provision before entering into the deposit agreement.

If you or any other owner or holder of ADSs bring a claim against us or the depositary in connection with matters arising under the deposit agreement or the ADSs, including claims under federal securities laws, you or such other owner or holder may not be entitled to a jury trial with respect to such claims, which may have the effect of limiting and discouraging lawsuits against us and/or the depositary. If a lawsuit is brought against us and/or the depositary under the deposit agreement, it may be heard only by a judge or justice of the applicable trial court, which would be conducted according to different civil procedures and may result in different outcomes than a trial by jury would have had, including results that could be less favorable to the plaintiff(s) in any such action.  

Nevertheless, if this jury trial waiver provision is not permitted by applicable law, an action could proceed under the terms of the deposit agreement with a jury trial. No condition, stipulation or provision of the deposit agreement or ADSs serves as a waiver by any owner or holder of ADSs or by us or the depositary of compliance with any substantive provision of the U.S. federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder. By agreeing to the jury trial waiver provision in the deposit agreement, investors will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with or the depositary’s compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations promulgated thereunder.

Our Articles of Association and By-laws and French corporate law contain provisions that may delay or discourage a takeover attempt.

Provisions contained in our Articles of Association and/or French corporate law could make it more difficult for a third party to acquire us, even if doing so might be beneficial to our shareholders. In addition, provisions of our bylaws impose various procedural and other requirements, which could make it more difficult for shareholders to effect certain corporate actions. These provisions include the following:

You may not be able to exercise your right to vote the ordinary shares underlying your ADSs.

Holders of ADSs may exercise voting rights with respect to the ordinary shares represented by the ADSs only in accordance with the provisions of the deposit agreement. The deposit agreement provides that, upon receipt of notice of any meeting of holders of our ordinary shares, the depositary will fix a record date for the determination of ADS holders who will be entitled to give instructions for the exercise of voting rights. Upon timely receipt of notice from us, if we so request, the depositary will distribute to the holders as of the record date (1) the notice of the meeting or solicitation of consent or proxy sent by us and (2) a statement as to the manner in which instructions may be given by the holders.

Purchasers of ADSs may instruct the depositary of the ADSs to vote the ordinary shares underlying their ADSs. Otherwise, purchasers of ADSs will not be able to exercise voting rights unless they withdraw the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs they hold. However, a holder of ADSs may not know about the meeting far enough in advance to withdraw those ordinary shares. If we ask for a holder of ADSs’ instructions, the depositary, upon timely notice from us, will distribute notice of the upcoming vote and arrange to deliver our voting materials to him or her. We cannot guarantee to any holder of ADSs that he or she will receive the voting materials in time to ensure that he or she can instruct the depositary to vote his or her ordinary shares or to withdraw his or her ordinary shares so that he or she can vote them. If the depositary does not receive timely voting instructions from a holder of ADSs, it may give a proxy to a person designated by us to vote the ordinary shares underlying his or her ADSs. In addition, the depositary and its agents are not responsible for failing to carry out voting instructions or for the manner of carrying out voting instructions. This means that a holder of ADSs may not be able to exercise his or her right to vote, and there may be nothing he or she can do if the ordinary shares underlying the ADSs are not voted as he or she requested. 

Purchasers of ADSs may not be directly holding our ordinary shares.

A holder of ADSs will not be treated as one of our shareholders and will not have direct shareholder rights. French law governs our shareholder rights. The depositary will be the holder of the ordinary shares underlying ADSs held by ADS holders. The deposit agreement among us, the depositary and the owners and holders of ADSs, sets out ADS holder rights, as well as the rights and obligations of the depositary.

The right as a holder of ADSs to participate in any future preferential subscription rights or to elect to receive dividends in shares may be limited, which may cause dilution to ADS holders.

According to French law, if we issue additional securities for cash, current shareholders will have preferential subscription rights for these securities on a pro rata basis unless they waive those rights at an extraordinary meeting of our shareholders (by a two-thirds majority vote) or individually by each shareholder. However, ADS holders in the United States will not be entitled to exercise or sell such rights unless we register the rights and the securities to which the rights relate under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, or an exemption from the registration requirements is available. In addition, the deposit agreement provides that the depositary will not make rights available to ADS holders unless the distribution to ADS holders of both the rights and any related securities are either registered under the Securities Act or exempted from registration under the Securities Act. Further, if we offer holders of our ordinary shares the option to receive dividends in either cash or shares, under the deposit agreement the depositary may require satisfactory assurances from us that extending the offer to holders of ADSs does not require registration of any securities under the Securities Act before making the option available to holders of ADSs. We are under no obligation to file a registration statement with respect to any such rights or securities or to endeavor to cause such a registration statement to be declared effective. Moreover, we may not be able to establish an exemption from registration under the Securities Act. Accordingly, ADS holders may be unable to participate in our rights offerings or to elect to receive dividends in shares and may experience dilution in their holdings. In addition, if the depositary is unable to sell rights that are not exercised or not distributed or if the sale is not lawful or reasonably practicable, it will allow the rights to lapse, in which case you will receive no value for these rights.

Purchasers of ADSs may be subject to limitations on the transfer of their ADSs and the withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares.

ADSs, which may be evidenced by ADRs, are transferable on the books of the depositary. However, the depositary may close its books at any time or from time to time when it deems expedient in connection with the performance of its duties. The depositary may refuse to deliver, transfer or register transfers of ADSs generally when our books or the books of the depositary are closed, or at any time if we or the depositary think it is advisable to do so because of any requirement of law, government or governmental body, or under any provision of the deposit agreement, or for any other reason subject to a holder of ADSs’ right to cancel his or her ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares. Temporary delays in the cancellation of ADSs and withdrawal of the underlying ordinary shares may arise because the depositary has closed its transfer books or we have closed our transfer books, the transfer of ordinary shares is blocked to permit voting at a shareholders’ meeting or we are paying a dividend on our ordinary shares. In addition, a holder of ADSs may not be able to cancel his or her ADSs and withdraw the underlying ordinary shares when he or she owes money for fees, taxes and similar charges and when it is necessary to prohibit withdrawals in order to comply with any laws or governmental regulations that apply to ADSs or to the withdrawal of ordinary shares or other deposited securities.

As a foreign private issuer, we are exempt from a number of rules under the U.S. securities laws and are permitted to file less information with the SEC than a U.S. company. This may limit the information available to holders of ADSs.

We are a foreign private issuer, as defined in the SEC’s rules and regulations and, consequently, we are not subject to all of the disclosure requirements applicable to public companies organized within the United States. For example, we are exempt from certain rules under the Exchange Act that regulate disclosure obligations and procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies, consents or authorizations applicable to a security registered under the Exchange Act, including the U.S. proxy rules under Section 14 of the Exchange Act. In addition, our officers and directors are exempt from the reporting and “short-swing” profit recovery provisions of Section 16 of the Exchange Act and related rules with respect to their purchases and sales of our securities. Moreover, while we currently make annual and semi-annual filings with respect to our listing on Euronext Growth Paris and expect to file financial reports on an annual and semi-annual basis, we will not be required to file periodic reports and financial statements with the SEC as frequently or as promptly as U.S. public companies and will not be required to file quarterly reports on Form 10-Q or current reports on Form 8-K under the Exchange Act. Accordingly, there will be less publicly available information concerning our company than there would be if we were not a foreign private issuer. 

As a foreign private issuer, we are permitted and we expect to follow certain home country practices in relation to corporate governance matters that differ significantly from Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards. These practices may afford less protection to shareholders than they would enjoy if we complied fully with the corporate governance standards of Nasdaq.

As a foreign private issuer listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market, we will be subject to Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards. However, Nasdaq rules provide that foreign private issuers are permitted to follow home country corporate governance practices in lieu of Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards as long as notification is provided to Nasdaq of the intention to take advantage of such exemptions. We intend to rely on exemptions for foreign private issuers and follow French corporate governance practices in lieu of Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards, to the extent possible. Certain corporate governance practices in France, which is our home country, may differ significantly from Nasdaq corporate governance standards. For example, as a French company, neither the corporate laws of France nor our bylaws require a majority of our directors to be independent and we can include non-independent directors as members of our remuneration committee, and our independent directors are not required to hold regularly scheduled meetings at which only independent directors are present.

We are also exempt from provisions set forth in Nasdaq rules which require an issuer to provide in its bylaws for a generally applicable quorum, and that such quorum may not be less than one-third of the outstanding voting stock. Consistent with French law, our bylaws provide that a quorum requires the presence of shareholders having at least (1) 20% of the shares entitled to vote in the case of an ordinary shareholders’ general meeting or at an extraordinary shareholders’ general meeting where shareholders are voting on a capital increase by capitalization of reserves, profits or share premium, or (2) 25% of the shares entitled to vote in the case of any other extraordinary shareholders’ general meeting.

As a foreign private issuer, we are required to comply with certain Nasdaq rules and Rule 10A-3 of the Exchange Act, relating to audit committee composition and responsibilities. Under French law, the audit committee may only have an advisory role and appointment of our statutory auditors, in particular, must be decided by the shareholders at our annual meeting.

Therefore, our shareholders may be afforded less protection than they otherwise would have under Nasdaq’s corporate governance standards applicable to U.S. domestic issuers.

We may lose our foreign private issuer status in the future, which could result in significant additional cost and expense.

While we currently qualify as a foreign private issuer, the determination of foreign private issuer status is made annually on the last business day of an issuer’s most recently completed second fiscal quarter and, accordingly, the next determination will be made with respect to us on June 30, 2022. In the future, we would lose our foreign private issuer status if we fail to meet the requirements necessary to maintain our foreign private issuer status as of the relevant determination date. We will remain a foreign private issuer until such time that more than 50% of our outstanding voting securities are held by U.S. residents and any of the following three circumstances applies: (i) the majority of our executive officers or directors are U.S. citizens or residents; (ii) more than 50% of our assets are located in the United States; or (iii) our business is administered principally in the United States.

The regulatory and compliance costs to us under U.S. securities laws as a U.S. domestic issuer may be significantly more than costs we incur as a foreign private issuer. If we are not a foreign private issuer, we will be required to file periodic reports and registration statements on U.S. domestic issuer forms with the SEC, which are more detailed and extensive in certain respects than the forms available to a foreign private issuer. We would be required under current SEC rules to prepare our financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, rather than IFRS, and modify certain of our policies to comply with corporate governance practices associated with U.S. domestic issuers. Such conversion of our financial statements to U.S. GAAP would involve significant time and cost. In addition, we may lose our ability to rely upon exemptions from certain corporate governance requirements on U.S. stock exchanges that are available to foreign private issuers such as the ones described herein and exemptions from procedural requirements related to the solicitation of proxies.

We are an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act and will be able to avail ourselves of reduced disclosure requirements applicable to emerging growth companies, which could make the ADSs less attractive to investors.

We are an “emerging growth company,” as defined in the U.S. Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act of 2012, or the JOBS Act, and we intend to take advantage of certain 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(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, or the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. 

We cannot predict if investors will find the ADSs less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find the ADSs less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for the ADSs and the price of the ADSs may be more volatile. We may take advantage of these reporting exemptions until we are no longer an emerging growth company. We will remain an emerging growth company until the earliest of (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenue of $1.07 billion or more; (ii) the last day of our fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the closing date of our U.S. initial public offering; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in nonconvertible debt during the previous three years; and (iv) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the SEC.

U.S. holders of ADSs may suffer adverse tax consequences if we are characterized as a passive foreign investment company.

Generally, if, for any taxable year, at least 75% of our gross income is passive income, or at least 50% of the value of our assets is attributable to assets that produce passive income or are held for the production of passive income, including cash, we would be characterized as a passive foreign investment company, or PFIC, for U.S. federal income tax purposes. For purposes of these tests, passive income includes dividends, interest, and gains from the sale or exchange of investment property and rents and royalties other than rents and royalties which are received from unrelated parties in connection with the active conduct of a trade or business. If we are characterized as a PFIC, U.S. holders of the ADSs may suffer adverse tax consequences, including having gains realized on the sale of the ADSs treated as ordinary income, rather than capital gain, the loss of the preferential rate applicable to dividends received on the ADSs by individuals who are U.S. holders, and having interest charges apply to certain distributions by us and the proceeds of sales of the ADSs. See Item 10.E “Taxation” of this annual report for additional details.

Our status as a PFIC will depend on the composition of our income (including whether we receive certain non-refundable grants or subsidies and whether such amounts and reimbursements of certain refundable research tax credits will constitute gross income for purposes of the PFIC income test) and the composition and value of our assets, which may be determined in large part by reference to the market value of the ADSs, which may be volatile, from time to time. Our status may also depend, in part, on how quickly we utilize the cash proceeds from our U.S. initial public offering. Based on the current composition of our gross income and assets and on reasonable assumptions and projections, we believe that it is more likely than not that we would not have been considered a PFIC for our taxable year ending December 31, 2020; and, based on a similar analysis, we do not expect to be considered a PFIC for our taxable year ending December 31, 2021. However, there can be no assurance that we will or will not be considered a PFIC for these years or any future taxable year.

Investments in our securities may be subject to prior governmental authorization under the French foreign investment control regime.

Pursuant to the provisions of the French Monetary and Financial Code (code monétaire et financier), any investment by any non-French citizen, any French citizen not residing in France, any non-French entity or any French entity controlled by one of the aforementioned persons or entities that will result in the relevant investor (a) acquiring control of an entity registered in France, (b) acquiring all or part of a business line of an entity registered in France, or (c) for non-EU or non-EEA investors crossing, directly or indirectly, alone or in concert, a 25% threshold of voting rights in an entity registered in France, in each case, conducting activities in certain strategic industries, such as the industry in which we operate, is subject to the prior authorization of the French Ministry of Economy, which authorization may be conditioned on certain undertakings.

In the context of the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic, the Decree (décret) n°2020-892 dated July 22, 2020 as modified by the Decree (décret) n°2020-1729 dated December 28, 2020, has created, until December 31, 2021, a new 10% threshold of the voting rights for the non-European investments in listed companies, in addition to the 25% abovementioned threshold.

The foreign investment control regime described above applies to companies engaged in activities essential to protecting public health as well as biotechnology-related research and development activities.

Therefore, any investor meeting the above criteria willing to acquire all or part of our business with the effect of crossing the applicable share capital thresholds set forth by the French Monetary and Financial Code will have to request this prior governmental authorization before acquiring our ordinary shares or ADSs. We cannot guarantee that such investor will obtain the necessary authorization in due time. The authorization may also be granted subject to conditions that deter a potential purchaser. The existence of such conditions to an investment in our securities could have a negative impact on our ability to raise the funds necessary to our development. In addition, failure to comply with such measures could result in significant consequences for the investor (including the investment to be deemed null and void). Such measures could also delay or discourage a takeover attempt, and we cannot predict whether these measures will result in a lower or more volatile market price of our ADSs or ordinary shares. 

We must maintain effective internal control over financial reporting, and if we are unable to do so, the accuracy and timeliness of our financial reporting may be adversely affected, which could hurt our business, lessen investor confidence and depress the market price of our securities.

We must maintain effective internal control over financial reporting in order to accurately and timely report our results of operations and financial condition. In addition, as a public company listed in the United States, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act will require, among other things, that we assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting at the end of each fiscal year. We anticipate being first required to issue management’s annual report on internal control over financial reporting, pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, in connection with issuing our consolidated financial statements as of and for the year ending December 31, 2022 and the filing of our second annual report with the SEC.

The rules governing the standards that must be met for our management to assess our internal control over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act are complex and require significant documentation, testing and possible remediation. These stringent standards require that our audit committee be advised and regularly updated on management’s review of internal control over financial reporting. We are in the process of designing, implementing, and testing the internal control over financial reporting required to comply with this obligation. This process is time-consuming, costly, and complicated. In addition, our independent registered public accounting firm will be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting beginning with our annual report following the date on which we are no longer an “emerging growth company,” which may be up to five fiscal years following the date of our U.S. initial public offering.

Our management may not be able to effectively and timely implement controls and procedures that adequately respond to the increased regulatory compliance and reporting requirements that will be applicable to us as a public company listed in the United States. If we fail to staff our accounting and finance function adequately or maintain internal control over financial reporting adequate to meet the demands that will be placed upon us as a public company listed in the United States, our business and reputation may be harmed and the price of our ADSs may decline. Furthermore, investor perceptions of us may be adversely affected, which could cause a decline in the market price of our securities.