Table of Contents

​

​

UNITED STATES

SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION

WASHINGTON, D.C. 20549

​

FORM 20-F

​

(Mark One)

​

OR

​

​

For the fiscal year ended December 31, 2021

​

OR

​

​

OR

​

​

Commission File Number 001-38974

​

BIOPHYTIS S.A.

​

(Exact name of Registrant as specified in its charter and translation of Registrant’s name into English)

​

FRANCE

(Jurisdiction of incorporation or organization)

​

Biophytis S.A.

Sorbonne University—BC 9, Bâtiment A 4ème étage

4 pace Jussieu

75005 Paris, France

 (Address of principal executive offices)

​

*Not for trading, but only in connection with the registration of the American Depositary Shares.

​

Securities registered or to be registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act.  None

​

Securities for which there is a reporting obligation pursuant to Section 15(d) of the Act.  None

​

Indicate the number of outstanding shares of each of the issuer’s classes of capital or common stock as of the close of the period covered by the annual report.  Ordinary shares:  135,953,657 shares outstanding as of December 31, 2021

​

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

​

Table of Contents

If this report is an annual or transition report, indicate by check mark if the registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934. ☐ Yes   ☒ No

​

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

​

Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the registrant was required to submit such files). ☒ Yes  ☐ No

​

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

​

​

If an emerging growth company that prepares its financial statements in accordance with U.S. GAAP, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards† provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐

​

​

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

​

Indicate by check mark which basis of accounting the registrant has used to prepare the financial statements included in this filing:

​

If “Other” has been checked in response to the previous question, indicate by check mark which financial statement item the registrant has elected to follow. ☐ Item 17 ☐ Item 18

​

If this is an annual report, indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act).  ☐ Yes   ☒ No

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

​

TABLE OF CONTENTS

​

​

​

​

​

Table of Contents

INTRODUCTION

Unless otherwise indicated, “BIOPHYTIS,” “the Company,” “our company,” “we,” “us” and “our” refer to BIOPHYTIS S.A. and its consolidated subsidiaries.

This annual report may contain references to our trademarks and to trademarks belonging to other entities. Solely for convenience, trademarks and trade names referred to in this annual report, including logos, artwork and other visual displays, may appear without the ® or ^TM symbols, but such references are not intended to indicate, in any way, that we will not assert, to the fullest extent under applicable law, our rights or the rights of the applicable licensor to these trademarks and trade names. We do not intend our use or display of other companies’ trade names or trademarks to imply a relationship with, or endorsement or sponsorship of us by, any other company.

Our audited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with International Financial Reporting Standards, or IFRS, as issued by the International Accounting Standards Board, or IASB. Our financial statements included in this annual report are presented in euros and, unless otherwise specified, all monetary amounts are in euros. All references in this annual report to “$,” “US$,” “U.S.$,” “U.S. dollars,” “dollars” and “USD” mean U.S. dollars and all references to “€” and “euros,” mean euros, unless otherwise noted. Throughout this report, references to ADSs mean American Depositary Shares, or ADSs, or ordinary shares represented by such ADSs, as the case may be.

​

​

Table of Contents

SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS

This Annual Report on Form 20-F, or annual report, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, that are based on our management’s beliefs and assumptions and on information currently available to our management. All statements other than present and historical facts and conditions contained in this annual report, including statements regarding our future results of operations and financial positions, business strategy, plans and our objectives for future operations, are forward-looking statements. When used in this annual report, the words “anticipate,” “believe,” “can,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “is designed to,” “may,” “might,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “objective,” “should,” or the negative of these and similar expressions identify forward-looking statements. Forward-looking statements include, but are not limited to, statements about:

​

Table of Contents

You should refer to the section of this annual report titled “Item 3.D—Risk Factors” for a discussion of important factors that may cause our actual results to differ materially from those expressed or implied by our forward-looking statements. As a result of these factors, we cannot assure you that the forward-looking statements in this annual report will prove to be accurate. Furthermore, if our forward-looking statements prove to be inaccurate, the inaccuracy may be material. In light of the significant uncertainties in these forward-looking statements, you should not regard these statements as a representation or warranty by us or any other person that we will achieve our objectives and plans in any specified time frame or at all. We undertake no obligation to publicly update any forward-looking statements, whether as a result of new information, future events or otherwise, except as required by law.

You should read this annual report and the documents that we reference in this annual report and have filed as exhibits to this annual report completely and with the understanding that our actual future results may be materially different from what we expect. We qualify all of our forward-looking statements by these cautionary statements.

This annual report contains market data and industry forecasts that were obtained from industry publications. These data involve a number of assumptions and limitations, and you are cautioned not to give undue weight to such estimates. We have not independently verified any third-party information. While we believe the market position, market opportunity and market size information included in this annual report is generally reliable, such information is inherently imprecise.

​

​

​

Table of Contents

Table of Contents

2

Table of Contents

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

Our business has been and could in the future be materially adversely affected by the effects of health pandemics or epidemics, including COVID -19 and its related variants, or emergence of other infectious diseases, 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 has been and could in the future be materially adversely affected by the effects of health pandemics or epidemics, including COVID -19 and its related variants, or emergence of other infectious diseases. COVID-19 has prompted severe lifestyle and commercial restrictions aimed at reducing the spread of the disease. Governments have imposed quarantines and other restrictions in response to the pandemic. We have also implemented social distancing and sanitary measures as well as a work-from-home policy for most of our employees. Some of our clinical study sites had to be temporarily closed during the pandemic, and we were forced to revise the protocols and obtain IRB review and approval to continue our SARA INT clinical trial, which has since been completed. Although the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be gradually subsiding as a result of widespread access to vaccines and other preventative measures, additional variants that are more infectious or deadly may emerge in the future, and any future restrictions implemented in response to COVID-19 or another health pandemic or epidemic, or emergence of other infectious diseases could negatively impact our 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, among other factors. Although we do not currently anticipate any further impacts to our clinical programs from COVID-19 or another pandemic or endemic, or emergence of other infectious diseases, 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 currently anticipate any clinical supply issues or concerns for our planned clinical trials, any future restrictions resulting from the COVID -19 pandemic or other health pandemics or epidemics or emergence of other infectious diseases 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 could be affected by a resurgence of COVID -19 (or emergence of new vaccine resistant strains) or emergence of new pandemics, epidemics or other infectious diseases. For example, site initiation and patient enrollment could be impacted by a resurgence of COVID-19 (or emergence of new vaccine resistant strains), and

3

Table of Contents

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 or another virus, may be delayed or disrupted, which could 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. A resurgence of COVID -19 (or emergence of new vaccine resistant strains) or emergence of new pandemic, epidemic or other infectious diseases could 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 to the regulatory authorities, 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, other pandemic or epidemic, or emergence of other infectious diseases could materially adversely affect the value of our ADSs and ordinary shares.

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with no products approved or authorized 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 €18.9 million, €25.5 million and €31.2 million ($35.4 million) (translated solely for convenience into dollars at an exchange rate of €1.00=$1.1318, the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 31, 2021) for the years ended December 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021, 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, emergency use authorizations, or conditional marketing

4

Table of Contents

authorization and any expenses associated with commercializing, marketing and selling products approved or authorized 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, 2021, we had capital resources consisting of cash and cash equivalents of €23.9 million ($27.1 million) (translated solely for convenience into dollars at an exchange rate of €1.00=$1.1318, the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 31, 2021). Since December 31, 2021, we drew down €4 million from our 2021 credit facility with ATLAS Special Opportunities LLC (“ATLAS”).

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:

5

Table of Contents

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 or authorized for commercialization, and successfully marketed. To date, we have primarily financed our operations through the sale of debt and equity securities (including our U.S. initial public offering in February 2021), 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 (€1.0 million as of December 31, 2021) ($1.1 million) (translated solely for convenience into dollars at an exchange rate of €1.00=$1.1318, the noon buying rate of the Federal Reserve Bank of New York on December 31, 2021) 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.

6

Table of Contents

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, drug candidates, or misread trends in the aging or age-related disease space, or in the biotechnology 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:

7

Table of Contents

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., 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. Kreos waived its right to exercise the warrant when subscribing to the new financing structure described below.

In April 2020, we signed a convertible bond financing of €24 million with ATLAS to continue the development of Sarconeos (BIO101). Pursuant to the terms of the agreement (as amended), ATLAS agreed to subscribe for up to €24 million in convertible bonds, to be issued by us in up to eight tranches of €3 million each. We issued the eighth tranche in December 2021. On June 14, 2021, we signed a new convertible bond financing of €32 million with ATLAS. Pursuant to the terms of the agreement, ATLAS agreed to subscribe for up to €32 million in convertible bonds, to be issued by us in up to eight tranches of €4 million each. The first tranche has not been issued yet.

On November 19, 2021, we entered into a Subscription Agreement, a Straight Bonds Issue Agreement and a Convertible Bonds Issue Agreement with Kreos Capital VI (UK) Ltd. and Kreos Capital VI (Expert Fund) L.P., 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 €7.75 million in convertible bonds and for up to €2.25 million in non-convertible bonds, to be issued by us in up to four tranches. The first two tranches were issued on November 22, 2021. Each tranche of non-convertible bonds bears a 10% annual interest rate and must be repaid in 36 monthly installments, with monthly payments commencing in April 2022. Each tranche of convertible bonds bears a 9.5% annual interest rate and must be repaid or converted into shares by 31 March 2025. In connection with the Kreos financing, we issued 2,218,293 warrants giving them the right to purchase 2,218,293 new ordinary shares at an exercise price of €0.56 per share over a seven year period from the issue date. By subscribing to the warrants, Kreos waived its right to exercise the warrants issued to Kreos within the framework of the 2018 loan structure described above.

Pursuant to the terms of the agreements with Kreos, 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.

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.

8

Table of Contents

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 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, emergency use authorization or conditional marketing authorization, manufacture and commercialization of our drug candidates.

We have no products approved or authorized for sale. Our lead drug candidate, Sarconeos (BIO101), is in clinical development and our second drug candidate, Macuneos (BIO201) is still in the preclinical development 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 (“FDA”), and European Medicines Agency (“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, emergency use authorization or conditional marketing authorization, and commercialization of drug candidates. 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, emergency use authorization or conditional marketing authorization 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:

9

Table of Contents

10

Table of Contents

These factors, many of which are beyond our control, could cause us to experience significant delays or an inability to obtain regulatory approvals or authorizations, or commercialize or license our drug candidates. Even if regulatory approvals or authorizations 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 or emergency use authorization for our drug candidates under applicable regulatory requirements. The denial, delay or imposed limitations of or on any such approval or authorization 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 or authorization 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. 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. Further, 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, mostly regarding conditions for our targeted patients to participate in our current or future trials.

The research, testing, manufacturing, packaging, labeling, approval, authorization, 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

11

Table of Contents

States or any other country until they receive the requisite approval or authorization from the applicable regulatory authorities of such jurisdictions.

Separately, in response to the global COVID-19 pandemic, on March 10, 2020, the FDA announced its intention to postpone most foreign inspections of manufacturing facilities and products through April 2020. The FDA reported in July 2021 that the agency had largely returned to standard operations for domestic inspections; however, the agency’s foreign inspectional activities, including inspections for drug establishments, were still hampered by the pandemic. The FDA’s delayed inspections caused drug application delays, which meant that the applicants’ schedule for commercializing the drugs were affected negatively. In January 2022, the FDA again put certain inspectional activities on hold because of the spread of the Omicron variant of COVID-19. In February 2022, FDA announced that it will again resume its domestic inspectional activities, considering the decline in COVID-19 cases in the United States. FDA will continue with mission-critical foreign inspections, as well as any previously planned foreign surveillance inspctions with country clearance, and which are within the Center for Disease Control and Prevention’s Level 1 or Level 2 COVID-19 travel recommendation. Otherwise, FDA expects that it will resume additional foreign inspectional activities in April. It is possible that new variants will continue to emerge in the future, further interrupting and affecting the agency’s ability to carry out inspections in a timely manner. If global health concerns related to the emergence of new variants or new viruses 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 or authorization 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 or authorization processes and are commercialized.

Even if we eventually complete clinical testing and receive approval or authorization from the FDA, EMA or applicable foreign authorities for any of our drug candidates, the applicable agency may grant approval or authorization contingent on the

12

Table of Contents

performance of costly additional clinical trials, which may be required after approval or authorization. The FDA, EMA or the applicable foreign regulatory agency also may approve or authorize our drug candidates for a more limited indication or a narrower patient population than we originally requested, and the applicable agency, may not approve or authorize 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 or authorization 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 or authorization for our drug candidates.

We may experience delays in obtaining the necessary regulatory authorization for our various clinical programs, 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:

13

Table of Contents

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 authorization, or commercialize our drug candidates, including:

14

Table of Contents

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 (“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 or authorization 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.

15

Table of Contents

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. The combined effects of high vaccination rates with reduction in patient numbers and mutations in the COVID-19 virus that may decrease its virulence and cause less severe disease, may decrease our ability to complete the study and file for approval.

A resurgence of COVID-19 (or emergence of new vaccine resistant strains), pandemic, endemic, or emergence of other infectious disease, may limit our ability or the investigators’ ability to find and retain medical staffs that are needed to conduct the clinical studies.

The COVID-19 pandemic has caused a shortage of labor force, including nurses, clinicians, and other medical staff. This shortage is causing medical institutions and other establishments to change their operations to accommodate the shortage, and in many cases, it results in increased personnel costs in finding and retaining the staffs that are necessary to conduct the institutions and establishments’ operations. While COVID-19 cases have been decreasing, due in part to more people being vaccinated, a resurgence of COVID-19 (or emergence of new vaccine resistant strains), or emergence of other pandemic, epidemic, or other infectious diseases, could cause or exacerbate a staffing shortage, our ability to conduct clinical trials may be negatively affected, and we may need to modify, suspend, or stop our clinical trials, or expend greater resource in identifying and retaining the appropriate personnel necessary for the clinical investigations.

16

Table of Contents

Our participation in an expanded access program in Brazil could subject us to adverse event reporting requirements in the United States, potentially leading to modification, suspension, or stoppage of the ongoing investigations

We are planning to organize, subject to regulatory approval by ANVISA, an expanded access program (EAP) in Brazil for hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 symptoms who are mechanically ventilated in intensive care units. Under FDA regulations we are required to review and submit IND safety reports for suspected adverse reactions whether such safety information is collected from foreign or domestic sources. If adverse reactions occur during the expanded access program in Brazil, we will need to review and submit the safety reports to FDA, even if the COVA clinical investigation has stopped recruiting new patients due to the lack of enrollment, and will be subsequently concluded. FDA may review the safety information for other uses of Sarconeos (BIO101) such as the expanded access program if it meets the applicable threshold, or other clinical investigations that study Sarconeos (BIO101).

Our drug candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties that could delay or prevent their regulatory approval or authorization, limit the commercial profile of an approved or authorized label, or result in significant negative consequences following marketing approval or authorization, 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 or authorization 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 or authorized, 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 or authorization 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 continuing 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 or authorization, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:

17

Table of Contents

Any of the foregoing events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular drug candidate, if approved or authorized, 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 or authorization, 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 or authorizations, 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 or authorized 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 or authorized, will depend on a number of factors, including:

18

Table of Contents

We cannot assure you that our current or future drug candidates, if approved or authorized, will achieve broad market acceptance among physicians and patients. Any failure by our drug candidates that obtain regulatory approval or authorization 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 or authorized 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 (“GMP”) batches/GMP-compliant batches/batches produced in compliance with GMP of Sarconeos (BIO101) for our clinical trials and we believe we can secure sufficient quantities for our future 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 or authorization for Sarconeos (BIO101) would be affected. If we receive regulatory approval or authorization, 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

19

Table of Contents

to produce Macuneos (BIO201) for future clinical trials, our ability to obtain regulatory approval or authorization for Macuneos (BIO201) would be affected. If we receive regulatory approval or authorization, 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 or authorization 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 or authorization 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 or authorized 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. If new restrictions are imposed as a result of a COVID-19 resurgence, any new pandemic or epidemic, or emergence of other infectious diseases, 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.

20

Table of Contents

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 (“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 (“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 or adopt their own policies in response to continuing COVID-19 or other pandemics, epidemics, or other infectious diseases that may create delays or service disruptions, including work-from-home policies that lead 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 or authorization 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 or authorized, 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 or authorizations 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 (“OTC”) treatments, for a share of some patients’ discretionary budgets and for physicians’ attention within their clinical practices.

21

Table of Contents

We are aware of other companies seeking to develop treatments to prevent or treat aging-related diseases through various biological pathways. 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 using different technologies (e.g., cellular and gene therapy, integrin regulation, and others), for example, Allegro Ophthalmics, Apellis Pharmaceuticals, Kodiak Sciences, Astellas, Hemera Biosciences, Ionis Pharmaceuticals, 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 for COVID-19, and some of these therapies have already received approval or authorization for emergency usage. These entities may be more successful at developing, manufacturing or commercializing therapies 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 or authorized.

Furthermore, there are a number of preventative vaccines in development and others that have already been authorized and widely distributed. If the COVID-19 pandemic subsides as a result of these vaccines, it may reduce demand for our product.

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 or authorization 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

22

Table of Contents

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 (“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 a marketing authorization. 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 and its subcommittees (Transparency Commission or CT, and the Commission for Economic and Public Health Evaluation or CEESP, if applicable) 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 and the French National Union of Health Insurance Funds, or UNCAM which fixes the reimbursement rate of medicines covered by statutory health insurance. The final decision on price and reimbursement is issued by the French Minister of Health and can be revised afterwards, for example, 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 as well as other price control mechanisms. 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 or authorization. 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 or authorization.

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.

23

Table of Contents

In the event we elect to commercialize any of our drug candidates that receive regulatory approval or authorization, 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 authorized, 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 or authorization 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 five 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

24

Table of Contents

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 or authorization 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

25

Table of Contents

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

26

Table of Contents

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 or authorization 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 (“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 (“SCCs”) in their form before June 2021) 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, 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.

27

Table of Contents

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

28

Table of Contents

approvals or authorization 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 or authorized. 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.

29

Table of Contents

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 (“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 final decision is expected by the end of 2022. It has been alleged 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

30

Table of Contents

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

31

Table of Contents

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 is 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.

32

Table of Contents

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 or authorized.

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:

33

Table of Contents

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

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

If our drug candidates are approved or authorization, they may 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 or authorization. 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, import holds, import refusals, or 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, holds, or refusals may also occur while the FDA attempts to verify the imported products’ compliance with the law. Such detentions, holds, or refusals 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.

34

Table of Contents

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 instance, in France) and must be consistent with the information in the product’s approved or authorized label. As such, we may not promote our products for indications or uses for which they do not have approval or authorization. The holder of an approved or authorized application must submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval or authorization for certain changes to the approved or authorized 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 or authorization. In addition, under European regulation, certain of our drug candidates could be added to the list of drugs subject to additional monitoring and studies. 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 or safety studies, 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 or authorization 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 or authorization 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, Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use was adopted in 2014 and became effective as of January 31, 2022 and could impact the administrative procedure that we will have to follow in order to obtain regulatory approval or authorization 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 and decisions from the European Commission, EMA and 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

35

Table of Contents

restricted the FDA’s ability to engage in routine oversight activities such as implementing rules 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 or authorization that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.

Changes in COVID-19 infectiousness or lethality rates, or eradication or substantial eradication of the disease could reduce or eliminate the demand for our product.

We are currently concluding the global, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, group-sequential, and adaptive two-part Phase 2-3 study (COVA) in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Widespread access to vaccines or other therapeutic options significantly reduced or eliminated our ability to enroll subjects in the COVA program. For example, On December 22, 2021, FDA issued an EUA for Paxlovid for the treatment of mild-to-moderate coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older weighing at least 40 kg) with positive results of direct severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) viral testing, and who are at high risk for progression to severe COVID-19, including hospitalization or death. On December 8, 2021, the FDA also issued an EUA for Evusheld for the pre-exposure prophylaxis (prevention) of COVID-19 in certain adults and pediatric individuals (12 years of age and older weighing at least 40 kilograms. On October 29, 2021, the FDA has officially granted Emergency Use Authorization of the Pfizer-BioNTech COVID-19 vaccine for children ages 5-11. A substantial proportion of the population has now had COVID-19, which may have provided further immunity and/or lead to a mild clinical course that only very rarely results in hospitalization (as is now seen with the Omicron variant).

In addition, spread of new COVID-19 variants that do not cause severe respiratory illnesses are reducing the demand for our product and impacting our ability to enroll subjects for the COVA study. For example, information that is known about the newer variants suggest that there is some possibility that while they are more infectious, they do not cause severe respiratory illnesses as frequently as the prior variants did. If this is the case, the demand for our Sarconeos (BIO101) could be significantly reduced.

Regulatory agencies may change the policies and requirements regarding approvals and emergency use authorizations, or revoke emergency use authorizations that the agencies have already issued.

Under section 564 of the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (“FD&C Act”), following a public health emergency declaration by the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS), the FDA Commissioner may allow unapproved medical products, or unapproved uses of approved medical products, to be used in an emergency to diagnose, treat, or prevent serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions caused by chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear (CBRN) threat agents when there are no adequate, approved, and available alternatives. The EUA allows temporary use of the medical product, based on efficacy data, which is usually not sufficient on its own for approval. Many drugs and medical devices have received emergency use authorizations under this framework, and we plan to seek emergency use authorization for at least one of our drug candidates. There is some risk, however, that the public health emergency declaration could be terminated before or soon after we complete the development of our drug, or even if we obtain an EUA, that the FDA will revoke the EUA. In fact, the FDA has already begun promulgating guidance documents that discuss disposition of products that are distributed pursuant to EUAs. If this occurs, we may no longer be able to distribute our product, or our distribution and marketing efforts may be severely restricted.

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 (the “Hatch-Waxman Act”), a pharmaceutical manufacturer may file an abbreviated new drug application (“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 (“NDA”) under section 505(b)(2) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the “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

36

Table of Contents

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 have received and may seek additional orphan drug designations 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 obtained and may pursue orphan drug designation for certain of our future drug candidates. In the European Union, the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products (“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 may entitle a party to financial incentives such as reduction of regulatory fees or fee waivers and ten years of market exclusivity following drug or biological product approval unless a derogation applies. 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.

We may seek additional orphan drug designations in the future for some of our future drug candidates but FDA or EMA may decline our application. 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.

37

Table of Contents

Enacted and future healthcare legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval or authorization 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 (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,

38

Table of Contents

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 and payors. 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 or authorized. Such laws include:

39

Table of Contents

40

Table of Contents

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 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 or to ensure that they will not use the personal data for other purposes than agreed on. Moreover, the transfer of data from the EU to our U.S. entities or others U.S. companies must (i) have a legal basis in GDPR or other national data protection laws, and (ii) 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 lead to severe impact for individuals and 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 European Court of Justice’s decision to invalidate the EU—U.S. Privacy Shield as part of the Schrems II decision, any transfer or storage of data from the EU 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. In case such additional safeguards do not lead to sufficient protection of personal data, transfers must be suspended or not carried out at all.

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 (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, authorized, 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 or authorizations. We or our third-party intermediaries may have direct or indirect interactions with officials and

41

Table of Contents

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 €2.8 million, €3.3 million and €4.1 as of December 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021, 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.

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

In general, 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. Treasury and Internal Revenue Service (the “IRS”) 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. Additionally, current tax laws may continue to be subject to interpretations and implementing regulations by the U.S. Treasury and 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.

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 have and will continue to 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 (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 has and will continue to increase our legal and financial compliance costs, make some

42

Table of Contents

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 in the future be required to furnish 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 has and will continue to have an impact on our disclosure of information and requires 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.

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:

43

Table of Contents

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 are quoted in U.S. dollars on the Nasdaq Capital Market and our ordinary shares trade 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, authorization, 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:

44

Table of Contents

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.

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.

45

Table of Contents

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 28, 2022, we had 140,084,309 ordinary shares issued and outstanding. In addition, as of that date we had outstanding warrants to acquire up to 11,970,284 ordinary shares, 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, and 6,631,068 free ordinary shares that were granted to our two founders on September 15, 2021 and will be delivered to them on September 15, 2022 after a one-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.

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.

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.

All of the 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

46

Table of Contents

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:

47

Table of Contents

48

Table of Contents

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.

ADS holders 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

49

Table of Contents

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 to and do 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. However, 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

50

Table of Contents

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. Based on the composition of our gross income, assets, activities, and market capitalization in 2021, and on reasonable assumptions, we believe that it is more likely than not that we were not a PFIC for our taxable year ending December 31, 2021. However, there can be no assurance that we will not be a PFIC for our current taxable year ending December 31, 2022 or for any prior or future taxable year. Our U.S. counsel expresses no opinion regarding our conclusions regarding our PFIC status.

51

Table of Contents

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 and the Decree (décret) n°2021 1758 dated December 22, 2021, has created, until December 31, 2022, 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 identified a material weakness in our internal control over financial reporting as of December 31, 2021 related to our failure to correctly apply IFRS 9 “Financial Instruments” to the fair value assessment of our convertible notes, and its related interpretations and rules with respect to their accounting treatment. We have implemented control procedures to mitigate this risk, but if we are still unable to establish and maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting in this matter, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results in a timely manner, which may adversely affect investor confidence in us and materially and adversely affect our business and operating results.

In connection with our fiscal 2021 audit, we identified a material weakness in our internal controls over financial reporting related to our failure to correctly apply IFRS 9 “Financial Instruments” to the fair value assessment of our convertible notes, and its related interpretations and rules with respect to their accounting treatment. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected and corrected on a timely basis.

In response to the control deficiencies described above, our management is implementing a remediation plan, which it believes will remediate the material weakness that has been identified. We cannot assure that the measures we have taken to date and may take in the future, will be sufficient to remediate the control deficiencies that led to our material weakness in internal control over financial reporting or that we will prevent or avoid potential future material weaknesses. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial reports. These remediation measures may be time consuming and costly and there is no assurance that these initiatives will ultimately have the intended effects.

If we identify any new material weaknesses in the future, any such newly identified material weakness could limit our ability to prevent or detect a misstatement of our accounts or disclosures that could result in a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements. In such case, we may be unable to maintain compliance with securities law requirements regarding timely filing of periodic reports in addition to applicable stock exchange listing requirements, investors may lose confidence in our financial reporting and our stock price may decline as a result. We cannot assure you that the measures we have taken to date, or any measures we may take in the future, will be sufficient to avoid potential future material weaknesses.

52

Table of Contents

We must establish and 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 establish and 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 requires, among other things, that we assess the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting at the end of each fiscal year.

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. This process is time-consuming, costly, and complicated.

Our current controls and any new controls that we develop may become inadequate because of changes in conditions in our business. Further, additional weaknesses in our disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting may be discovered in the future. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement could harm our results of operations or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations and may result in a restatement of our financial statements for prior periods. Any failure to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting also could adversely affect the results of periodic management evaluations and annual independent registered public accounting firm attestation reports regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting that we will eventually be required to include in our periodic reports that will be filed with the SEC. Ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial and other information, which would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our shares. In addition, if we are unable to continue to meet these requirements, we may not be able to remain listed on the Nasdaq Capital Market.

Our independent registered public accounting firm is not required to formally attest to the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting until after we are no longer an emerging growth company as defined in the JOBS Act. At such time, our independent registered public accounting firm may issue a report that is adverse in the event it is not satisfied with the level at which our internal control over financial reporting is documented, designed, or operating. Any failure to maintain effective disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations and could cause a decline in the price of our shares.

53

Table of Contents

existing cash and cash equivalents, from the funding line of convertible notes set up with ATLAS. For the near future, our investments will mainly remain in France where our research and development facilities are currently located.

The SEC maintains an Internet site that contains reports, proxy information statements and other information regarding issuers that file electronically with the SEC. The address of that site is http://www.sec.gov. Our website address is www.biophytis.com. The reference to our website is an inactive textual reference only and information contained in, or that can be accessed through, our website or any other website cited in this annual report is not part of this annual report.

Overview

We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company focused on the development of therapeutics that are aimed at slowing the degenerative processes associated with aging and improving functional outcomes for patients suffering from age-related diseases, including severe respiratory failure in patients suffering from COVID-19. Our goal is to become a leader in the emerging field of aging science by delivering life-changing therapies to the growing number of patients in need. To accomplish this goal, we have assembled an experienced and skilled group of industry professionals, scientists, clinicians and key opinion leaders from leading industry and academic institutions from around the world.

A number of degenerative diseases associated with aging have been characterized in the last century, including sarcopenia and AMD. The pathophysiology of these and many other age-related diseases is not yet well understood, and effective treatment options are lacking. The global population of people over the age of 60 is expected to double from approximately 962 million in 2017 to 2.1 billion by 2050, according to estimates from the United Nations’ World Population Prospects: the 2017 Revision. We believe that the need for effective therapeutics for age-related diseases will continue to grow throughout the 21^st century. In addition, healthcare costs, including costs associated with treatments and long-term care for age-related diseases associated with this demographic shift, are expected to rise proportionally, as effective treatment options are currently lacking. We believe that developing treatments to slow disease progression and reduce the risk of severe disability associated with age-related diseases is of the utmost importance.

As we age, our physical, respiratory, visual and cognitive performances gradually decline due, in part, to the cumulative deleterious effect of multiple biological and environmental stresses, including current and emerging viral infections, to which we are exposed during our lifetime. The functional decline can be much faster in some individuals as a consequence of, among other things, the degenerative processes affecting specific cells, tissues and organs. Through evolution, cells, tissues and organisms have developed natural means or pathways to counteract and balance the effects of the many stresses they face. This natural ability to compensate for stress and remain functional, called biological resilience, degrades over time. The decline in biological resilience contributes to the acceleration of these degenerative processes and the impairment of functional performances, which, in turn, can lead to severe disability, reduced health-span and ultimately death. This occurs as we age, but can occur at a younger age, when genetic mutations exist, or in the case of infection and inflammation.

COVID-19 was recognized as a worldwide pandemic by WHO in March 2020. There are many ongoing clinical studies to develop medical responses to COVID-19. A few anti-viral agents (including bamlanivimab and etesevimab (administered together), Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir), and molnupiravir) as well as monoclonal antibodies (sotrovimab and Evusheld (tixagevimab co-packaged with cilgavimab and administered together)) have already received authorizations in the United States for specific indications and patient groups, with Veklury (remdesivir) having been approved in the U.S. by the FDA for use in adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older and weighing at least 40 kg) for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization. Moreover, a number of vaccines have now been authorized around the globe; while many more remain in development, including vaccines that are developed by Sanofi and GlaxoSmithKline. In the EU, Veklury (remdesivir) is conditionally approved while other drugs such as RoActemra and Kineret (anakinra) have received marketing authorizations or are currently being reviewed, including Paxlovid (PF-07321332 and ritonavir) and Lagevrio (molnupiravir). Furthermore, EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) issued so-called favorable Article 5(3) Opinions under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 for the use of different treatment options (including Lagevrio, Bamlanivimab/etesevimab, Casirivimab/imdevimab, Dexamethasone, Paxlovid, Regdanvimab and Sotrovimab) and has started evaluating Evusheld (tixagevimab and cilgavimab). Age, co-morbidities, heavy smoking, male gender and several ethnic backgrounds are associated with worse outcomes. Our therapeutic approach is aimed at targeting and activating key biological resilience pathways that can protect against and counteract the effects of the multiple biological and environmental stresses, including inflammatory, oxidative, metabolic and viral stresses that lead to age-related diseases.

54

Table of Contents

Our lead drug candidate, Sarconeos (BIO101), is an orally administered small molecule in development for the treatment of neuromuscular diseases. Sarconeos (BIO101) is a plant-derived pharmaceutical-grade purified 20-hydroxyecdysone.

The initial indication we are seeking approval for is sarcopenia, an age-related degeneration of skeletal muscle, which is characterized by a loss of muscle mass, strength and function in elderly people (adults 65 years of age and older) leading to reduced mobility, or mobility disability, and increased risk of adverse health events and hospitalization, and potential death resulting from falls, fractures, and physical disability. There is currently no approved medication for sarcopenia, which is present in the elderly (greater than 65 years old) with an estimated prevalence range between six to 22% worldwide.

Sarconeos (BIO101) is also in development to treat patients with severe respiratory manifestations of COVID-19. We are currently concluding the COVA study, a global, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, group-sequential, and adaptive two-part Phase 2-3 study, in patients with SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. We are planning to organize, subject to regulatory approval by ANVISA, in an expanded access program in Brazil for hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 symptoms who are mechanically ventilated in intensive care units. Most people infected with the COVID-19 virus and its variants will experience mild to moderate respiratory illness and recover without requiring special treatment. Older people, and those with underlying medical problems like cardiovascular disease, diabetes, chronic respiratory disease and cancer are more likely to develop serious illness. In January 2022, we received approval from the ANVISA (Brazilian health authority) for an expanded access program to treat hospitalized patients with severe COVID-19 symptoms that are mechanically ventilated with Sarconeos (BIO101) and not eligible for the COVA study.

We are also developing Sarconeos (BIO101) for DMD, a rare genetic neuromuscular disease in male children and young adults, which is characterized by an accelerated degeneration of muscle and is responsible for a loss of mobility, respiratory failure and cardiomyopathy, leading to premature death. There is currently no cure and limited treatment options for DMD, which affects approximately 2.8 out of 100,000 people worldwide (approximately 20,000 new cases annually worldwide), based on our estimates from publicly available information.

Our second drug candidate, Macuneos (BIO201), is an orally administered small molecule in development for the treatment of retinopathies. It is a plant-derived pharmaceutical-grade purified norbixin. We have completed preclinical cellular and animal studies of Macuneos (BIO201) for the treatment of retinopathies. While we are still in the early stages of development, we believe that the results from our preclinical studies support continued investigation into whether Macuneos (BIO201) may stimulate biological resilience and protect the retina against phototoxic damage that leads to vision loss. The initial indication we plan to seek approval for is dry AMD, a common eye disorder among people over the age of 50 that affects central vision, impairing functions such as reading, driving, and facial recognition, and has a major impact on quality of life and the ability to live independently. There are currently no approved treatments for dry AMD. Based on our estimates from publicly available information, AMD affects approximately 8.5% of the global population (ages 45 to 85) and is expected to increase over time as the population ages.

We are also exploring Macuneos (BIO201) as a potential treatment for Stargardt disease, which shares many of the characteristics of dry AMD. Stargardt disease is the most common form of inherited macular degeneration that typically develops in childhood and leads to vision loss and, in some cases, blindness.

Subject to our entering into commercialization agreements in relation to two patent applications we recently filed, which are further described below as patent families S8 and S9, we hold exclusive commercialization rights through licenses for each of our drug candidates. We currently plan to develop our drug candidates through clinical PoC (typically Phase 2), and then seek licensing and/or partnership opportunities for further clinical development through regulatory approval and commercialization.

We have developed our lead clinical drug candidate Sarconeos (BIO101), preclinical drug candidate Macuneos (BIO201), and a preclinical pipeline of life-cycle extension products, consisting of BIO103 and BIO203, through a drug discovery platform in collaboration with Sorbonne University in Paris, France based on work with medicinal plants. Plants are major sources of small molecules, called secondary metabolites, which they produce as a defense mechanism to various environmental stresses, including attack from predatory and pathogenic species (e.g., insects, bacteria and fungi). Our drug discovery platform is based on a reverse pharmacology approach that tests a collection of bioactive secondary metabolites along with chemical analogs that we have synthesized in phenotypic screens of various age-related diseases. Our long-term goal is to advance the field of aging science with the continued discovery and development of new drug candidates that treat age-related diseases by stimulating biological resilience pathways that are involved in the aging process and/or age-related diseases.

We have assembled an executive team of scientific, clinical, and business leaders with broad expertise in biotechnology and clinical drug development (see Item 6.A for more information on our directors and senior management).

55

Table of Contents

Our Clinical Pipeline

We are developing a portfolio of programs targeting biological resilience pathways that slow the degenerative processes associated with aging and improve functional outcomes for patients suffering from age-related diseases. Our current pipeline of drug candidates is illustrated below.

​

​

Our Strategy

We are focused on the development of therapeutics that improve functional outcomes for patients suffering from age-related diseases. Our goal is to build Biophytis into a leading biotechnology company focused on targeting biological resilience pathways that slow the degenerative processes associated with age-related disease progression in order to improve the lives of millions of patients that have limited or no treatment options. We currently plan to develop our drug candidates and then seek licensing and/or partnership opportunities for further clinical development through regulatory approval and commercialization. To achieve our goal, we are pursuing the following strategies:

56

Table of Contents

Our Drug Candidates

Sarconeos (BIO101)

Our lead drug candidate, Sarconeos (BIO101), is an orally administered small molecule in development for the treatment of neuromuscular diseases. We have completed preclinical studies and are in various stages of further clinical development for the treatment of neuromuscular diseases. While preclinical studies provide limited data, based on results from our cellular and animal studies, we believe Sarconeos (BIO101) stimulates biological resilience through activation of the MAS Receptor, which may preserve muscle strength, mobility and respiratory function in various age-related conditions.

In addition, MAS activation could potentially counter the deleterious effects of the SARS-CoV -2 infection. Data from models of ALI suggest a further protective role of Sarconeos (BIO101) on the pulmonary tissue. In light of this, we began investigating Sarconeos (BIO101) in the COVA study in patients with severe respiratory manifestations of COVID-19 as an initial potential indication for Sarconeos (BIO101). The enrollment for this study ended April 7, 2022, earlier than planned, due to our inability to recruit sufficient patients in a suitable timeframe as a result of the developing pandemic. It is now rare for patients with Covid-19 disease to be admitted to hospitals for respiratory failure, due to the combined effect of high vaccination rates, high numbers of patients becoming immune through prior infection and the mild disease from the predominant Omicron variant.

Another indication we are developing is sarcopenia, an age-related degeneration of skeletal muscle, which is characterized by a loss of muscle mass, strength, function and mobility disability, and increased risk of adverse health events and potential death resulting from falls, fractures, and physical disability. There is currently no approved prescription for sarcopenia, which is highly prevalent in the elderly (adults 65 years of age and older) with an estimated prevalence between six to 22% worldwide.

We are also developing Sarconeos (BIO101) for DMD, the most common form of muscular dystrophy in children leading to early mortality. We are focusing on non-ambulatory patients with signs of respiratory deterioration.

57

Table of Contents

History and Development of Sarconeos (BIO101)

In collaboration with Sorbonne University in Paris, France, we began our drug discovery efforts with a class of plant secondary metabolites called phytoecdysteroids, which are produced by plants to protect against insect attack. Phytoecdysteroids are analogs of the insect molting hormones ecdysone, which protects the plants by acting as endocrine disrupters and/or feeding deterrent. Phytoecdysteroids are found in various medicinal plants throughout the world and are used in traditional medicines as tonics or anti-diabetics.

We utilized a reverse pharmacology approach starting with phenotypic screens of a collection of phytoecdysteroids that had been gathered for over 30 years by scientists from Sorbonne University, along with chemical analogs that we have synthesized for their ability to stimulate protein synthesis in muscle cells. We selected 20-hydroxyecdysone for clinical development based on its safety profile, pharmacological activity and potential in maintaining key muscle functions, including mobility and strength. This compound was tested in animal models submitted to different stresses, including metabolic stress (high fat dieting or diabetic models), age-related stress (sarcopenia and disuse models), and genetic-related stress (DMD and Spinal Muscular Atrophy models). We are also testing the compound for infectious-related disease stress (COVID-19). Once pharmacological effects were detected, we identified the molecular target(s) and potential mechanism-of-action.

Potential Mechanism-of-Action

The MAS Receptor, the protective arm of the Renin-Angiotensin System (RAS)

Our preclinical studies demonstrate that Sarconeos (BIO101) activates the MAS Receptor in muscle cells, a key component of the RAS. The RAS is a fundamental endocrine system that is known to control fluid balance and blood pressure, playing a key role in cardio-vascular function. It is also involved in the regulation of smooth, cardiac and skeletal muscle metabolism, and plays a key role in muscle function and mobility in disease states. It is made up of two different arms that counter-regulate each other: (i) the “classical” arm (or ACE / angiotensin-II (Ang-II) / Ang-II receptor type 1 (AT1R) axis), and (ii) the “protective” arm (or ACE2 / angiotensin 1-7 (Ang-1-7) / MAS Receptor axis). Ang-II blood concentration has been shown to be increased with aging and in various neuromuscular diseases, such as sarcopenia and respiratory diseases that are caused by viruses such as SARS-CoV-2. Ang 1-7, the endogenous ligand of the MAS Receptor, opposes the numerous actions of Ang-II on muscle and cardio respiratory functions.

We believe Sarconeos (BIO101), through the activation of the MAS Receptor, triggers two key downstream signaling-pathways: (i) the P13K/AKT/mTOR pathway, or the AKT pathway, which is known to be responsible for increasing protein synthesis, (ii) the AMPK/ACC pathway, or the AMPK pathway, which is known to be involved in stimulating energy production. We have demonstrated that Sarconeos (BIO101) activates major signaling pathways such as the AKT pathway and potentially the AMPK pathway in C2C12 myotubes and human muscle cells through western blot analysis. The AKT pathway and AMPK pathway have all been shown to be impaired in muscle wasting conditions.

58

Table of Contents

The potential mechanism-of-action through activation of the MAS Receptor is illustrated in the diagram below:

​

​

We believe that the AKT and AMPK pathway are potentially the key factors for (i) preserving muscle mass and increasing muscle strength under muscle wasting conditions and (ii) increasing muscle strength and improved endurance, respectively. We have also observed in preclinical studies that activation of the MAS Receptor by Sarconeos (BIO101) shares many common properties with Ang-1-7 at the cellular level. However, Sarconeos (BIO101) did not show an effect on blood pressure or heart rate when compared to enalapril, an angiotensin-converting enzyme, or ACE, inhibitor.

The activation of MAS Receptor is thought to be a key component of the cardio-respiratory function. When it comes to COVID-19, SARS-CoV-2 infection, by down-regulation of ACE2 expression and activity, reduces the conversion of Ang-II to Ang-1-7 resulting in excessive levels of Ang-II. This imbalance between the “classical” and “protective” arms of the RAS due to excessive activation of AT1R and limited activation of MAS Receptor which explain some of the observations in clinical practice reported in COVID-19 patients. Therefore, we believe that restoration of the balance of the RAS, by directly activating MAS Receptor downstream of ACE2, would be a particularly relevant avenue to treat patients infected with SARS-CoV-2.

59

Table of Contents

The potential mechanism-of-action through activation of MAS Receptor downstream of ACE2 which rebalances RAS in SARS-Cov2 infected subjects is as follows:

​

​

Preclinical proofs of concept

Effect on myocyte differentiation into myotubes (in vitro)

Our preclinical data in C2C12 cell lines and human cell models suggest that Sarconeos (BIO101) enlarges myotubes, the main structural units of muscle, warranting continued research. We believe that this is important for limiting muscle mass loss and increasing muscle strength under muscle wasting conditions. As depicted below, results from an in vitro study demonstrate that human myotubes are larger in muscle cells treated with Sarconeos (BIO101) as compared to untreated control cells.

​

​

Effect of Sarconeos (BIO101) on mean myotube diameter

We believe Sarconeos (BIO101) directly targets muscle tissue and cells, and improves several key muscle cell functions, including protein synthesis, regeneration and energy production through key signaling pathways that are impaired in muscle wasting conditions, regardless of the disease stage, state of disease progression or severity, and may have the potential to improve muscle function and preserve strength, mobility and respiratory capacity in various neuromuscular diseases, independent of cause (i.e., age-related or genetic) and pathophysiology.

60

Table of Contents

Preclinical Development of Sarconeos (BIO101) in Sarcopenia.

We conducted numerous in vivo experiments in C57Bl/6J mouse models to assess the activity of Sarconeos (BIO101) within the context of aging, specifically studying a high fat diet and immobilization. Key in vivo results are summarized below.

Beneficial effect on mobility in mice. We administered Sarconeos (BIO101) at 50 mg/kg/day or a placebo to “old” mice (22 months old at the beginning of the study) that were fed a high-fat diet over 14 weeks. The mice were exercised on a treadmill and maximum running velocity (Vmax) was recorded after 14 weeks of treatment. Untreated “adult” mice (12 months old at the beginning of the study) were also fed a high-fat diet and exercised similarly to determine a positive control velocity. As shown in the graph below, “old” control mice had a Vmax that was approximately 21% less than “adult” control mice (p<0.001) demonstrating the effects of aging. Further, results showed that “old” mice treated with Sarconeos (BIO101) demonstrated a significant improvement in Vmax as compared to “old” control mice (p<0.01), compensating almost completely for the loss of mobility due to aging. These results were presented in December 2016 at the Society on sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders, or SCWD, conference in Berlin, Germany.

​

​

Effect of chronic Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment over
14 weeks on maximum running velocity in old mice

Preservation of muscle strength after immobilization in mice. To model muscle wasting associated with impaired mobility, we immobilized young mice (13 weeks old) and began administering either Sarconeos (BIO101) at 50 mg/kg/day or a placebo control (vehicle). After 14 days, we removed the immobilization and continued administration of Sarconeos (BIO101) for an additional 14 days. The absolute strength of hind limb muscle was recorded at various times over the 28-day period. As shown in the graph below, mice treated with Sarconeos (BIO101) demonstrated a preservation of muscle strength while immobilized compared to vehicle control. We believe these results support continued research to investigate whether Sarconeos (BIO101) could be an effective treatment to preserve muscle function under conditions of disuse or immobility.

​

​

Effect of chronic Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment over 28 days
on maximal absolute strength in hind limb-immobilized mice
​

61

Table of Contents

Preclinical Development of Sarconeos (BIO101) in COVID-19

ALI is acute lung injury caused by non-cardiogenic pathogenic factors and may develop to acute respiratory distress syndrome (“ARDS”) in severe cases. One of the important causes of ALI is virus infection that in some cases (including SARS-CoV-2) can deregulate the expression of RAS components by accelerating the imbalance of RAS and the occurrence and development of ALI/ARDS. Of particular interest, Sarconeos (BIO101)’s active principle ingredient (“API”) has shown lung anti-inflammatory and lung protective effects in various in vivo models of ALI known for being associated with severe RAS imbalance. A 2021 preclinical study revealed that Sarconeos (BIO101) daily treatment prevents respiratory function deterioration in SARS-CoV-2-infected mammals and provided a preclinical proof of concept for the concluding phase 2/3 COVA clinical study.

​

​

Effect of Sarconeos (BIO101) on SARS-CoV-2 infected hamsters

Enhanced pause (Penh) evaluation after BIO101 IP treatment of Sars-CoV-2-infected hamsters. As demonstrated in (A) above, Penh is a classically used and derived measure of respiratory distress. Penh is derived by assessing several measures of the respiratory response curve (peak expiratory flow of breath (PEF), peak inspiratory flow of breath (PIF), time of expiratory portion of breath (Te) and time required to exhale 65% of breath volume (Tr). EEP: End expiratory Pause. As noted in (B) above, this histogram shows Penh values of control group (not infected with SARS-CoV-2), infected with SARS-CoV-2 and treated with the vehicle (SARS-CoV-2 + vehicle) or infected with the SARS-CoV-2 and treated with BIO101 IP (SARS-CoV-2 + BIO101) with * p <0.05, and ** p <0.01. This data was referenced at at the European Congress of Clinical Microbiology and Infectious Diseases (“ECCMID”) in July 2021.

​

​

In the graphs above: (A) Inspiration time, (B) expiration time and (C) End Expiratory Pause (EEP) time evaluation after BIO101 IP treatment of SARS-CoV-2 infected hamsters. Histograms show values of control group (not infected with SARS-CoV-2), infected with SARS-CoV-2 and treated with the vehicle (SARS-CoV-2 + vehicle) or infected with the SARS-CoV-2 and treated with BIO101 IP (SARS-CoV-2 + BIO101) with * p <0.05, and ** p <0.01. This data was also referenced at at the ECCMID in July 2021.

Preclinical Development of Sarconeos (BIO101) in DMD

We conducted various in vivo experiments in mdx mice, a commonly used model of DMD. The results from these mdx mice studies were consistent with the results on cellular activity and functional outcomes from both in vitro and in vivo studies of Sarconeos (BIO101) in sarcopenia. We believe these results provide additional support for our belief that Sarconeos (BIO101) has the potential for improving mobility and muscle strength. In addition, we believe these results suggest that Sarconeos (BIO101) may increase respiratory function and decrease fibrosis. Key in vivo results in DMD are summarized below.

62

Table of Contents

Improved respiratory function in mice. The loss of respiratory function is a major health issue for later-stage, non-ambulatory patients with DMD. Results have shown that chronic (eight weeks) daily administration of 50/mg/kg of Sarconeos (BIO101) ameliorates the time-dependent degradation of respiratory function observed in C57BL10-mdx mice as compared to C57BL10 control mice. This protective effect on respiratory function is not only associated with breathing parameters as suggested by enhanced pause, or PenH, measurements, but also by an improvement of deep airway structure of the respiratory system shown by FlexiVent experiments, which are a common measurement for in vivo lung function. PenH is calculated as follows: (PIP/PEP) x Pause, where PIP is the maximum change in chamber pressure during inspiration, PEP is the maximum change in chamber pressure during expiration, and Pause equals (TE-TR)/TE, where TE is expiratory time and TR is relaxation time. As shown in the three graphs below, C57BL10-mdx mice treated with Sarconeos (BIO101) exhibited improved respiratory function as measured by resistance, elastance and PenH of the lung. These results were presented in March 2019 at the annual international congress of Myology in Bordeaux, France.

Effect of chronic Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment on resistance, elastance and airway reactivity (PenH).

Improved mobility and muscle strength in mice. We studied the effect of chronic oral administration of 50 mg/kg/day of Sarconeos (BIO101) on mobility and strength over eight weeks in C57BL10-mdx mice. Mobility was measured by running distance and strength was measured by maximum absolute strength (force) in the four-limb grip-test test. Results show that Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment improved mobility in certain animal models, as C57BL10-mdx mice treated with Sarconeos (BIO101) ran 2.4x farther than untreated control C57BL10-mdx mice. Results show that Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment improved muscle strength in animal models, as C57BL10-mdx mice treated with Sarconeos (BIO101) showed an approximate 14% improvement in strength as compared to untreated control C57BL10-mdx mice.

Effect of Sarconeos (BIO101) on mobility (running distance) and muscle strength (four-limb grip-test force).

63

Table of Contents

These in vivo results on muscle functionality (mobility and strength) in mice are consistent with cellular and molecular changes observed in our previous preclinical studies, including (i) improved energy metabolism (mitochondrial respiration and spare respiratory capacity), (ii) improved myoblast differentiation, and (iii) confirmed activation of the AKT Pathway involved in anabolism known for being impaired in DMD muscle. These results were presented in October 2018 at the World Muscle Society, or WMS, conference in Mendoza, Argentina (Dilda et al., 2018).

Improved lesion profile in mice. We have observed that Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment may improve the histological (muscular lesion) profile of muscle in mice, consistent with the improvements in physical performance and muscle function (mobility and strength), as mentioned above. We performed histopathological analysis of muscle from C57BL10-control mice, C57BL10-mdx mice and C57BL10-mdx mice treated with Sarconeos (BIO101). Muscles from C57BL10-mdx mice exhibited anisocytosis (atrophy of muscle fibers), as well as chronic inflammation associated with fibrosis as compared to healthy muscles from control mice. Observations of muscle from C57BL10-mdx treated mice showed that chronic administration of Sarconeos (BIO101) decreased anisocytosis and inflammation as compared to muscles from C57BL10-mdx mice. These results were presented in October 2017 at the WMS conference held in Saint Malo, France.

Sarconeos (BIO101) clinical development

Phase 1 Clinical Trial (SARA-PK)

We conducted a dose-escalating Phase 1 clinical trial (SARA-PK) to evaluate the safety, PK and PD effects of Sarconeos (BIO101) in 54 healthy adult and elderly subjects. Based on the results of the SARA-PK Phase 1 clinical trial, we chose 175 and 350 mg b.i.d. (twice daily) as the safe, active dosing levels for the SARA-INT Phase 2b clinical trial.

Single Ascending Dose. In the single ascending dose(“SAD”) phase, subjects were dosed once with Sarconeos (BIO101) at a range between 100 to 1,400 mg or placebo. No abnormal clinical vital signs and/or serious adverse events were reported as treatment emergent adverse events, or TEAE. All TEAEs were mild in severity and were resolved by the end of the study. No serious adverse events, or SAEs, were reported in the SAD phase.

Multiple Ascending Dose. The multiple ascending dose(“MAD”) phase was conducted with three selected doses of Sarconeos (BIO101) that were orally administered to 30 patients in total broken into three groups of older adults between 65 and 85 years over 14 days. Each group consisted of eight active and two placebo per dose.

64

Table of Contents

No abnormal clinical vital signs and/or adverse events were reported. Study results indicated that several patients experienced TEAEs, the most common were headache and nausea, with one participant reporting an event of food poisoning at the follow-up visit and dizziness postural (vertigo) and are described in the table below. All TEAEs were indicated as mild or moderate and were resolved by the end of the study. No SAEs associated with Sarconeos (BIO101) were reported in the MAD phase.

The pharmacokinetic analysis showed a short half-life between 3 to 4 hours and that the steady state was reached from the second day of administration in the MAD phase. No accumulation of Sarconeos (BIO101) was observed at 350 mg q.d. in the MAD phase (accumulation ratio of 1.14); however, a small accumulation was observed at 350 and 450 mg b.i.d. in the MAD phase (accumulation ratio of 1.31). We determined the optimal dosing of 175 and 350 mg b.i.d. from a PK modeling study.

We also evaluated the effects of Sarconeos (BIO101) on PD markers. Results showed a tendency towards a decreased plasma level in muscle catabolism markers (myoglobin, creatine kinase) and in markers of the RAS (aldosterone and renin). This is consistent with the proposed mechanism-of-action of Sarconeos (BIO101) and is coherent with the activity of Sarconeos (BIO101) on the RAS.

As shown in the graphs below, Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment over 14 days showed (i) a dose-dependent effect on muscle growth and repair, as measured by plasma Procollagen type III N-terminal peptide (PIIINP), a common marker of muscle growth, repair and fibrosis, and (ii) a dose-dependent negative correlation of muscle wasting, as measured by plasma myoglobin, a common marker of muscle catabolism.

Effect of Sarconeos (BIO101) treatment for 14 days on the evolution of PD markers related to muscle anabolism (PIIINP) and to muscle catabolism (myoglobin)

Results from the SARA-PK Phase 1 clinical trial were released in April 2017 in an oral presentation at the International Conference on Frailty & Sarcopenia Research, in Barcelona, Spain. The results were used to establish the dosing levels for the recently completed SARA-INT Phase 2b clinical trial. Additional dosing studies are recommended by FDA to proceed.

65

Table of Contents

Sarconeos (BIO101) for the treatment of age-related Sarcopenia

Biophytis is developing BIO101 to treat age-related degeneration of skeletal muscle. It is a major cause of mobility disability in the elderly, characterized by a loss of muscle mass, strength, balance and the ability to stand and/or walk, resulting in a loss of independence, increased risk of adverse health events and hospitalization, and potential death resulting from falls, fractures, and physical disability.

Sarcopenia was first defined in 1989 and officially classified as a disease in 2016 based on the establishment of a code from the WHO’s International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM), used by physicians, researchers and health systems. There is currently no widely accepted standard of care for sarcopenia, however, to our knowledge, current non-medicinal treatment recommendations primarily focus on moderate physical activity, such as 30 minutes of walking per day or resistance-based (strength) training, as they exert effects on both the nervous and muscular systems that are critical to positive physiological and functional adaptations in older adults, and nutritional intervention. According to the International Clinical Practice Guidelines for Sarcopenia (ICFSR): Screening, Diagnosis and Management (Dent et al., J Nutr Health Aging. 2018;22(10):1148-1161) there is moderate certainty of evidence for the beneficial effects of physical therapy in treating patients with sarcopenia as most of the evidence for physical activity comes from studies of non-sarcopenic older adults or those with mild-moderate sarcopenia. The efficacy of more structured physical activity programs along with certain supplementation (i.e. dietary protein intake and/ or nutrients) for the treatment of sarcopenia is being assessed in various studies, including the SPRINTT trial. However, no consensus on nutritional intervention currently exists.

The SARA Program - Phase 2 Clinical Trial (SARA-OBS and SARA-INT)

The SARA clinical program contains two studies:

SARA-OBS Study

Objectives and Study Design. The SARA-OBS study aimed to characterize sarcopenia in patients over the age of 65 at risk of mobility disability. The mobility and physical performance of these participants, including body composition was evaluated over a six-month period. This observational phase included two visits, one at the baseline and one at the end of the study, supplemented by a telephone interview at three months to determine whether participants were complaining of a poor physical condition. The SARA-OBS study was designed and structured as a pre-selection for the SARA-INT Phase 2b clinical trial.

66

Table of Contents

Results. Baseline characteristics of the 218 participants were presented in December 2018 at the Society on sarcopenia, Cachexia and Wasting Disorders conference in Maastricht, Netherlands and the virtual 13th annual congress of SCWD on December 12, 2020 and are summarized in the table below. We believe these characteristics are consistent with other clinical trials of sarcopenia patients, including the SPRINTT and LIFE trials.

​

The final results, on the main endpoints, for the 185 completers are:

​

400MWT = 400-meters walk-test; SPPB score = Short-Performance Physical Battery; 6MWT = 6-minute walk-test; Chair-stand = the chair-stand component of the SPPB

SARA-INT Phase 2b Study

Objectives and Endpoints. The objectives and endpoints of the study are summarized below:

​

67

Table of Contents

In addition, four pre-defined subgroup analyses were performed:

These subpopulations represented sarcopenia patients that were at a significantly high risk for deterioration and adverse outcomes.

Trial Design:    The trial design is summarized below:

Prospective participants were screened for a period of up to eight weeks prior to inclusion in the trial. The interventional phase was comprised of an inclusion visit (D0) where baseline measurements were taken on the first day and dosing started the following day (D1), a one-month safety visit (M1), a three-month follow-up visit (M3) with safety and reduced measurements in connection with the primary endpoint, a five-month telephone interview (M5), and a final six-month visit (M6) with safety and full measurements. For 50 patients who could not come to the scheduled end of treatment visit at month 6, treatment could be extended to at most 9 months, anticipating that thereafter Covid-19 restrictions would make it possible again for them to come to the site.

A total of 233 elderly patients with sarcopenia at risk of mobility disability were recruited in 22 clinical investigation centers in the United States and Belgium. Recruitment was completed in March 2020. During the first wave of the pandemic, clinical study sites were closed and we revised the protocols to continue our clinical trials. We informed the IRBs that oversee the clinical trials and received approvals for modifications resulting from COVID -19. Despite these and other impediments, we were able to retain most of the participants. A total of 196 participants completed the SARA-INT study, with or without an extension of up to 9 months of treatment. Of those, and due to COVID-19 restrictions, only 106 patients could perform the 400m walk test at the End-of-Study visit (M6/M9), which was the primary endpoint of our study (55% loss of efficacy data). This resulted in the study being underpowered. The last patient completed his final on-treatment visit in December 2020. Top-line results from this study were announced in August 2021, with Clinical Study Report (CSR) finalized in February 2022.

The effect of two doses of Sarconeos (BIO101), 175 mg bid and 350 mg bid, were compared to placebo in the Full Analysis Dataset (FAS) and in the Per-Protocol population (PP, subset of participants that complied to the clinical protocol), as well as in sub-populations of patients.

Results. Sarconeos (BIO101) at the highest dose of 350 mg bid showed an increase of 0.09 m/s in the FAS population and of 0.10 meters per second (m/s) in the PP population compared to placebo in observed data, for the 400-meter walking test (400MWT) in gait speed after 6 months of treatment in observed data. Statistical analyses based on Multiple and Bayesian imputation showed a LS Mean difference at Month 6 of 0.07 m/s in the FAS population (p=0.085) versus Placebo. Minimal Clinically Important Difference (MCID) for the 400MWT in sarcopenia is 0.1 m/s per the study protocol.

68

Table of Contents

However, the increase was not statistically significant, and none of the primary or secondary efficacy endpoints reached statistical significance.

Several results from the SARA-INT Phase 2b trial of Sarconeos (BIO101) in sarcopenia were presented at the ICFSR on September 30, 2021. ICFSR is the key international scientific event on frailty and sarcopenia, and is attended by leading researchers, physicians, and personnel from the biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies. The results are provided in graphs.

Effect of Sarconeos (BIO101) on the 400 MWT gait speed in the FAS population at Month 6 based on multiple imputation for subjects without data on On-Site Visit

Sarconeos (BIO101) at 350mg bid showed an increase on the 400MWT gait speed in sub-population at higher risk of mobility disability such as slow walkers (LS mean difference of 0.07 m/s versus placebo), obese subgroup (LS mean difference of 0.09 m/s versus Placebo), chair stand sub-score ≤2 of the SPPB (LS mean difference of 0.09 m/s versus placebo, p= 0.004) in the PP population at Month 6.

Effect of Sarconeos (BIO101) on the 400MWT gait speed in sub-population with higher risk of mobility disability (chair stand subscore ≤2) at Month 6

The COVID-19 pandemic and its related restrictions had a significant impact on the conduct of the study, with 55% of total participants not allowed to perform their on-site End of Study visit, despite the extension of their treatment period. Only 45 percent of the study subjects were able to complete the end of study assessments at the clinic and thus the study was underpowered to observe the hypothesized effect size, and the primary and secondary endpoints were not met.

Safety analysis. The proportion of subjects with Treatment-Emergent Adverse Events (TEAEs) was 52 (64.2%), 51 (68.0%), and 44 (59.5%) in the placebo, 175 mg and 350 mg BIO101 groups. The proportion of subjects with serious TEAEs was 9 (11.1%), 10 (13.3%), and 2 (2.7%) in the placebo, 175 mg and 350 mg BIO101 groups. There was no noticeable difference in TEAS, related TEAEs or Serious Adverse Events (SAEs) between treatment groups.

69

Table of Contents

A tabulated summary of safety data is presented below:

Adverse Events, Serious Adverse Events and Treatment Emergent Adverse Events in the Placebo, 175 mg bid and 350 mg bid groups in the SARA-INT study

Regulatory consultation with FDA

Upon review of the results, FDA reclassified the scheduled end-of-phase Type B meeting was reclassified to a Type C meeting. During the meeting, which was held on January 24, 2022, FDA discussed concerns that entering into Phase 3 would be premature, and recommended that we perform an additional Phase 2 dose-finding study to identify an optimal dose or dosing regimen, and further inform the safety profile for higher doses along with alternative dosing regimens, related safety information, and pharmacokinetics. We also discussed strategies to further define the proposed population and to refine the proposed indication, and development of other information and data that will assist us in preparing the chemistry, manufacturing, and control information to be submitted to FDA, as well as the regulatory non-clinical plan. We plan to assess, evaluate, and address FDA’s comments and recommendations in development of our continued Phase 2 part of a seamless Phase 2/3 program. We plan to have a Type C meeting with FDA in Q3 to discuss the clinical protocol design and the Clinical Outcome Asessments to be used in our next studies. Based on the comments from FDA, we plan to submit the protocols for our next studies in Q4 2022. We also anticipate discussions with the EMA in the first half of 2022, to get scientific advice including on the results of the Phase 2b study and potential progression into Phase 2/3.

Market Opportunity

Sarcopenia is a major cause of mobility disability in the elderly, resulting in a loss of independence, increased risk of adverse health events and hospitalization, and ultimately death. Sarcopenia is highly prevalent in adults greater than 65 years of age with an estimated prevalence between six to 22% worldwide. It poses a major public health issue and is steadily increasing as the global population ages. If approved by regulatory authorities for commercial use, we believe there is a market potential for Sarconeos (BIO101) in sarcopenia, as there is currently no approved medication for sarcopenia and an unmet medical need for therapeutic treatments.

Over the past two decades, other companies have launched multiple clinical development programs to treat sarcopenia, primarily with drug candidates falling in one of two classes: (i) myostatin inhibitors and (ii) selective androgen receptor modulators, or SARMs. Myostatin inhibitors, which primarily aim to increase muscle mass by blocking myostatin (myostatin acts as an essential negative regulator of muscle bulk), have been found to increase muscle mass in early clinical trials. However, they have yet to demonstrate effectiveness on clinically meaningful mobility outcomes (strength and mobility) or safety in larger clinical trials and/or have not progressed through the clinic. Both steroidal and non-steroidal SARMs have been tested as therapeutic agents for several medical conditions, including muscle-wasting diseases, but none have progressed through clinical development mainly due to safety concerns.

Based on our review of publicly available information, currently, neither myostatin inhibitors nor SARMs are being tested in late-stage clinical trials for sarcopenia. Based on our review of research in this area, we believe Sarconeos (BIO101) is currently the most advanced drug candidate being tested in a clinical program for the treatment of sarcopenia and has the potential to improve the vital functional outcomes of mobility disability necessary for regulatory approval. To our knowledge, there is currently no widely

70

Table of Contents

accepted standard of care for sarcopenia. Current non-medicinal treatment recommendations primarily focus on moderate physical activity, such as 30 minutes of walking per day or resistance-based (strength) training, as they exert effects on both the nervous and muscular systems that are critical to positive physiological and functional adaptations in older adults, and nutritional intervention. Other potential drug modalities that have been tested in the clinic for sarcopenia have yet to demonstrate effectiveness on clinically meaningful outcomes (strength and mobility) and/or safety in larger clinical trials and/or have not progressed through the clinic. Based on our understanding and discussions with regulatory agencies, including the FDA and EMA, functional mobility endpoints must be achieved in order to obtain marketing approval for sarcopenia.

Sarconeos (BIO101) for treatment of severe respiratory manifestation of COVID-19

COVID-19 was recognized as a worldwide pandemic by the WHO in March 2020. As of March 1, 2022, approximately 435 million people have been identified as having been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and more than 5.9 million have died because of COVID-19. COVID-19 is caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus. In its severe form, COVID-19 is associated with a plethora of complications, including:

There are many ongoing clinical studies to develop medical responses to COVID -19. A few anti-viral agents (including bamlanivimab and etesevimab (administered together), Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir), and molnupiravir) as well as monoclonal antibodies (sotrovimab and Evusheld (tixagevimab co-packaged with cilgavimab and administered together)) have already received authorizations in the United States for specific indications and patient groups, with Veklury (remdesivir) having been approved in the U.S. by the FDA for use in adults and pediatric patients (12 years of age and older and weighing at least 40 kg) for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization. Moreover, a number of vaccines have now been authorized around the globe; while many more remain in development. In the EU, Veklury (remdesivir) is conditionally approved whilst other drugs such as RoActemra and Kineret (anakinra) have received marketing authorizations or are currently being reviewed, including Paxlovid (PF-07321332 and ritonavir) and Lagevrio (molnupiravir). Furthermore, EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use (CHMP) issued so-called favorable Article 5(3) Opinions under Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 for the use of different treatment options (including Lagevrio, bamlanivimab/etesevimab, casirivimab/imdevimab, dexamethasone, Paxlovid, regdanvimab and sotrovimab) and has started evaluating Evusheld (tixagevimab and cilgavimab), Lagevrio (molnupiravir) and Olumiant (baricitinib).

Ample evidence points towards the membrane-bound ACE2 as the entryway of SARS-CoV -2 into the cells (in a manner similar to the previously described coronavirus-associated severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS)). Data is emerging that in COVID -19 increased levels of Ang-II are observed and are linked to the severity of the clinical syndrome. Despite the difficulty in measuring Ang -1 -7, some evidence has emerged that the levels of these peptides are indeed decreased in COVID -19 as well.

While we do not yet have evidence of the benefit of Sarconeos (BIO101) in animal models of COVID -19, it is very plausible to hypothesize that by activation of the MAS-receptor, Sarconeos (BIO101) could mitigate some of the downstream effects of the interaction between SARS-CoV-2 and ACE2. Indeed, studies that were conducted in a model of ALI have shown that 20-hydroxyecdysone can mitigate inflammation and reduce the levels of inflammatory markers. We have performed additional studies in animal models of COVID-19, in parallel with the COVA clinical program with the University of Liège in Belgium and other research institutions.

71

Table of Contents

SARS-CoV-2 infection, by down-regulation of ACE2 expression and activity, reduces the conversion of Ang-II to Ang-1-7 resulting in excessive levels of Ang-II. Ang-II levels in COVID-19 patients are significantly higher than in non-infected individuals and, more importantly, are linearly associated with viral load and lung injury. Moreover, the plasma levels of Ang-1-7 are significantly lower in COVID-19 patients versus healthy controls and particularly between COVID-19 patients admitted to ICUs compared to those who are not. Because most of SARS-CoV-2 deleterious effects including inflammation, fibrosis, thrombosis, pulmonary damage, point towards an imbalance of the RAS, we strongly believe that acting on the protective arm of RAS via its MAS Receptor downstream of ACE2 could have a beneficial effect in COVID-19-infected patients and, therefore, improve ARDS outcome.

The COVA Study

The COVA study is a global, multicenter, double-blind, placebo-controlled, group-sequential, and adaptive two-part Phase 2-3 study, with a total of 310-465 hospitalized patients in both parts. The final number of patients was recommended by the DMC based on the blinded second interim analyses and to protect the scientific integrity of the study. Since April 2020, however, only 237 patients meeting the study criteria have been enrolled in the trial in France, the United States, Belgium and Brazil, in approximately 35 clinical centers. Progression of the pandemic impacted our ability to enroll for the study.

The study focused on testing the benefit of Sarconeos (BIO101) in hospitalized patients 45 years old and older with severe respiratory manifestations of COVID-19. This study is intended to study Sarconeos (BIO101)’s effectiveness in hospitalized patients with severe respiratory manifestation.

During the study parts, two IAs were conducted by an independent DMC:

The primary endpoint of the COVA study is the proportion of participants with “negative” events (i.e. all-cause mortality and respiratory failure). The key secondary endpoint is: the proportion of participants with a “positive” event, i.e. discharge home due to improvement. Additional endpoints include: all-cause mortality, time to events, function scales and biomarkers.

We received an IND “may proceed” letter from the FDA (in the United States) and a CTA approval from ANVISA (Brazil), ANSM (France), MHRA (UK) and FAMHP (Belgium). Approximately 35 centers were planned for recruitment in Belgium, Brazil, France and the United States with a target of around 15 to 20 centers for the second part of the study. Recruitment for the Part 1 of the study began in July 2020. On January 8, 2021, the independent DMC of COVA reviewed the safety data analysis from the first 50 patients who were enrolled in the study, and recommended beginning recruitment for Part 2 of COVA. Following the DMC’s recommendation to begin the recruitment for Part 2 of COVA, authorization was obtained from the applicable regulatory authorities (national regulatory agencies and/or central IRB and/or local Ethics Committees) in Brazil and the United States for most clinical

72

Table of Contents

centers in the two countries for the start of Part 2 of the study. Similar authorizations to begin Part 2 of COVA were subsequently obtained from the applicable regulatory authorities in France and in Belgium. Enrollment for Part 1 was completed on January 21, 2021.

In September 2021, we received confirmation from the Data Monitoring Committee (DMC) to continue the Phase 2-3 COVA study without any modification of the protocol based on on the interim efficacy data that were reviewed by the DMC.

As of the date of this Annual Report, the COVA study has enrolled 237 patients hospitalized with severe pneumonia from COVID-19 infection in approximately 35 centers in the United States, Brazil, France and Belgium. Due to a variety of circumstances in the countries participating in this study (e.g., high vaccination rates and high rates of past infections providing (partial) immunity as well as the predominance of the Omicron variant that very rarely leads to hospitalization), recruitment has progressively slowed in the first months of 2022, with only 1 randomization in March. For these reasons, we have decided to stop enrollment in the study with immediate effect and we plan to obtain topline results after the end of the 28-day treatment period during the second quarter of 2022 and complete results in the third quarter of 2022.

Market opportunity

We believe there is a market opportunity for Sarconeos (BIO101) for the treatment of respiratory failure in COVID-19, subject to successful clinical trials and the FDA’s approval or authorization of Sarconeos (BIO101) for such indication. The COVID-19 pandemic continues to be a major public health issue, with a major impact on the economy of hundreds of countries. As of March 1, 2022, approximately 435 million people have been identified as having been infected with the SARS-CoV-2 virus, and more than 5.9 million have died because of COVID-19.

To our knowledge, although there are multiple initiatives to develop treatments, in the United States, Veklury (remdesivir) is the only product that has been approved for the treatment of COVID-19 requiring hospitalization, for adults and pediatric patients 12 years or older. Therapeutic products authorized by FDA under an EUA are the following: Olumiant (baracitinib), REGEN-COV (casirivimab and imdevimab), bamlanivimab and etesevimab, sotrovimab, Actemra (tocilizumab), Evusheld (tixagevimab co-packaged with cilgavimab), Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir), molnupiravir, and bebtelovimab.

In the EU, EMA has granted a marketing approval to the following drugs for the treatment of COVID-19: Kineret (anakinra), Regkirona (regdanvimab), RoActemra (tocilizumab), Ronapreve (casirivimab / imdevimab), and Xevudy (sotrovimab). The following drugs have received a conditonal marketing approval: Paxlovid (PF-07321332 / ritonavir), and Veklury (remdesivir). Marketing authorisation applications have been submitted for Olumiant (baricitinib), Evusheld (tixagevimab / cilgavimab) and Lagevrio (molnupiravir).

Finally, no treatment specifically targeting the stimulation of respiratory function in hospitalized COVID-19 patients has been approved or recommended for use in USA or in Europe.

Sarconeos (BIO101) for Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy (DMD)

DMD is a rare, genetic neuromuscular disease in male children and young adults, which is characterized by an accelerated degeneration of muscles and is responsible for a loss of mobility, respiratory failure and cardiomyopathy, leading to premature death. DMD is caused by mutations in the dystrophin gene that result in the absence of very low levels of functional dystrophin, a cytoskeletal protein that protects muscle cells. It is the most common form of muscular dystrophy in children, affecting approximately 2.8 out of 100,000 people worldwide (approximately 20,000 new cases annually worldwide), based on our estimates from publicly available information. DMD is caused by mutations in the dystrophin gene that result in the absence or very low levels of functional dystrophin, a cytoskeletal protein that protects muscle cells.

The absence of dystrophin in muscle severely weakens the structural and membrane stability of the muscle fibers. During normal muscle contraction and stretching the muscle fibers become damaged and eventually undergo necrosis (i.e., cell death). In order to compensate for the increased necrosis, muscle tissue regeneration is accelerated. This process soon becomes exhausted and muscle degeneration accelerates as muscle fibers are replaced by fat and connective tissue (fibrosis), resulting in the loss of muscle strength and mobility. DMD evolves according to a very well understood progression with symptoms that are similar to those associated with accelerated aging across all stages. DMD progression can be summarized as follows:

73

Table of Contents

Our Clinical Development Plans of Sarconeos (BIO101) in DMD (the MYODA program)

We have developed a formulation that is suitable to treat children, especially with swallowing difficulties. We have weight-adjusted the dose range of Sarconeos (BIO101) that we aim to test in the pediatric patient population based on modeling of data from animal studies and the SARA-PK Phase 1 trial in healthy adult and elderly participants. The low end of the dose range is driven by efficacy studies and the upper end of the dose range is driven by safety margins (toxicology and Phase 1). At the low end of the dose range, differences caused by the variance in animal models (i.e., species, age and size) could affect efficacy between animals and humans (both adults and children). At the high end of the dose range, differences in body composition, absorption and metabolism between the age and patient segments could affect safety margins and tolerability. We do not have actual experimental safety PK, PD or efficacy data from clinical testing in a pediatric patient population comprised of developing children (2-12 years), adolescents (12-16 years) or young adults. However, the MYODA clinical study is designed to fill this gap, by testing a range of doses in a dose escalating manner to address these potential differences in safety and efficacy.

We have designed our MYODA clinical program to specifically address the following known challenges in DMD clinical development:

In June 2018, we received orphan drug designation from the FDA and EMA for Sarconeos (BIO1010) in DMD. In December 2019, we received an IND “may proceed” letter from the FDA (USA) and we received a CTA approval from the FAMHP (Belgium) to start the MYODA study, and to investigate Sarconeos (BIO101) in non-ambulatory patients with signs of respiratory deterioration. In the “may proceed” letter from the FDA, the FDA noted that it had significant concerns with the design of the study, and that the results of the study, as originally designed to enroll ambulatory and non-ambulatory patients and measure muscle function deterioration through a composite score, would not be capable of providing interpretable data sufficient to support a marketing application. In its letter, the FDA recommended that we revise the study population and primary endpoint. We have incorporated the FDA’s recommendations and revised the protocol to focus on non-ambulatory patients with signs of respiratory deterioration and changed the primary endpoint to respiratory function. The revised protocol will be submitted as an amendment to the FDA and other regulatory authorities for review. We hope to start this study, which will be a global, double-blind, placebo-controlled, group-sequential, Phase 1-3 seamless study, in the second half of 2022, subject to any COVID-19-related delays and the impact of the pandemic on our operational capabilities.

74

Table of Contents

The MYODA study is expected to recruit up to 200 participants, as follows:

​

All the study participants will be treated for 48 weeks, followed by an open-label extension. Participants who are recruited during Part 1, to the lower dose cohorts, will be moved to a higher dose, once it is cleared to be used. An independent committee will oversee the study, will review the safety data and allow moving from one dose cohort to the next and will conduct IAs to allow progression from one part of the study to the next.

Because of the high unmet need, we have decided to focus, at this stage, on DMD patients who are non-ambulatory and with evidence of respiratory deterioration. The primary endpoint will be Change from Baseline in Percent Predicted Peak Expiratory Flow (PEF % predictive) at Week 48 (assessed by hospital-based spirometry measurements) and the key secondary endpoint is Change from Baseline in Forced Vital Capacity (FVC % predictive) at Week 48 (assessed by hospital-based spirometry measurements). Additional endpoints include other measures of respiratory function, functional scales, muscle strength and goal-attainment.

Our study design and clinical trial protocols are subject to regulatory approval and will be submitted to regulatory agencies for review. We plan to work with the agencies to finalize the protocols. Additional challenges and risks remain with our innovative clinical trial program, including:

Market Opportunity

We believe that there is market potential for Sarconeos (BIO101) in DMD, if approved by regulatory authorities for commercial use. DMD is the most common form of genetic muscular dystrophy in children, affecting approximately 2.8 out of 100,000 people worldwide (approximately 20,000 new cases annually worldwide), based on our estimates from publicly available information, resulting in premature death. There is currently no cure for DMD and there are only limited treatment options that aim to control the symptoms and slow the disease progression. In many countries, corticosteroids are the standard drug therapy. However, corticosteroids typically only slow the progression of muscle weakness and delay the loss of ambulation by up to two years, and their benefit for non-ambulatory boys with signs of respiratory deterioration, is not clear. They have also been associated with adverse side effects and are generally not suitable for long-term administration.

There are three targeted therapies (i.e., therapies targeting a specific dystrophin mutation by exon skipping or with stop codons) available on the market (two in the United States and one in Europe). As these therapies each target a specific gene mutation, they can only address the approximately 20% of the overall DMD patient population with those genetic mutations. In addition, there are only a few treatments that are in clinical development that target treatment of ambulatory children. There are very few early stage programs that target treatment of non-ambulatory patients with signs of respiratory deterioration.

75

Table of Contents

In addition to these targeted therapies, gene therapies that are under development aim to introduce a gene coding for a truncated dystrophin protein that could limit immune reactions. These therapies typically suffer from low transfection rates resulting in low levels of dystrophin expression and potential severe immune reactions. This leaves room for combinations of genetic treatments with other disease modifying agents, regardless of the mutation. Additional approaches in development include: immune modulators, anti-fibrotic agents and agents that enhance muscle mass and function.

We believe that Sarconeos (BIO101) directly targets muscle tissue and cells, may increase key muscle cell functions that are impaired independent of the genetic mutation that causes the disease, and has the potential to be used complementarily with corticosteroids, current targeted therapies and other gene therapies under development. We also believe that because Sarconeos (BIO101) targets various impaired muscle tissues and cells relevant to muscle strength, mobility and respiratory function, it may have the potential to be used in all stages of DMD progression, including both ambulatory and non-ambulatory patients. Due to the high unmet need, specifically in the population of non-ambulatory patients, with signs of respiratory deterioration, we decided to focus on this sub-population, at this stage.

Macuneos (BIO201)

Our second drug candidate, Macuneos (BIO201), is an orally administered small molecule in development for the treatment of retinopathies. The initial indication we plan to seek approval for is dry AMD, followed by Stargardt disease.

History and Development of Macuneos (BIO201)

Utilizing our expertise in functional screens and assays, we expanded our drug discovery efforts to other age-related diseases, with a focus on retinopathies. Using cellular models developed with the Institute of Vision at Sorbonne University in Paris, we screened a variety of carotenoids and flavonoids for their ability to protect retinal pigment epithelium (“RPE”) cells against the photo-oxidative stress induced by blue light in the presence of A2E, a phototoxic byproduct of the visual pigment cycle. We selected norbixin (an apo-carotenoid) for clinical development based on its pharmacological properties and safety profile in animal models of AMD and Stargardt disease. Next, we identified its molecular target(s) and identified a potential mechanism-of-action.

Potential mechanism-of-action

Inhibition of PPARs

Results from our preclinical studies support continued research to investigate whether Macuneos (BIO201) may protect RPE cells against the photo-oxidative stress induced by blue light in the presence of A2E through transrepression of peroxisome proliferator-activated receptors (“PPARs”). PPARs are nuclear receptors that primarily regulates carbohydrate and lipid metabolism in regenerative tissues only, and inflammatory processes in neuronal tissues, such as the brain or retina. Based on the result from our preclinical studies, we believe that Macuneos (BIO201) potentially counteracts the phototoxic effects of A2E by inhibition of PPARα and PPARγ responsible for the anti-oxidative, anti-inflammatory and anti-apoptotic activity observed in the retina. We believe that the mode of action (“MOA”) of BIO201 differs from the MOA of most PPAR activators that are typically associated with known side effects.

76

Table of Contents

The potential mechanism-of-action of BIO201 is illustrated in the diagram on the below:

Macuneos (BIO201) is an antagonist of PPAR, involved in protecting retinal cells

Preclinical Development

Proof of concept in cellular models

In collaboration with the Institute of Vision, we used models of primary porcine RPE cell cultures to test the effect of Macuneos (BIO201). We believe this model best preserves functional defense mechanisms against photo-oxidative stress and better represents functioning human RPE cells as compared to existing stable cell lines. We exposed these RPE cells to blue light in the presence of A2E in order to explore the protective effect of Macuneos (BIO201) on RPE cell death.

Increased cell survival. Our preclinical data indicate that Macuneos (BIO201) may protect RPE cells from cell death, in a dose-dependent manner, against the photo-oxidative stress induced by blue light in the presence of A2E. These results were presented in 2016 at the annual meeting of the Association for Research in Vision and Ophthalmology, or ARVO, in Seattle, Washington, and published in PLoSONE (Fontaine et al; 2016).

Effect of Macuneos (BIO201) on survival of RPE cells.

77

Table of Contents

Proof of concept in animal models

We have observed that Macuneos (BIO201) protects the retina after both oral and intra-vitreal administration in various animal models of AMD and Stargardt disease. The results from the studies, which are summarized below, were presented in 2016 at the annual meeting of the ARVO in Seattle, Washington.

Preservation of visual function in mice. We studied mice in which two genes encoding the proteins involved in the visual pigment cycle (the Abca4 transporter and the retinol dehydrogenase Rdh8) were absent. These animals, called Abca4-/- Rdh8-/-mice, accumulated A2E in their eyes and showed an early loss of electroretinogram amplitude. Our preclinical data suggest that chronic oral administration of Macuneos (BIO201) for three and six months may be effective in protecting the retina, as measured by electroretinography. This is a commonly used way to measure retinal function by looking at the electric signal transport from the retina to the brain. As shown in the figure below, Macuneos (BIO201) treated mice showed a less degraded electroretinogram as compared to the untreated control mice, meaning the treated mice have slower visual function loss. The six-month results were presented in 2018 at the annual meeting of the ARVO in Honolulu, Hawaii and recently published (Fontaine et al. Aging, 2020).

Effects of chronic oral administration of Macuneos (BIO201) on ERG Amplitude in Abca4[ib]-/[ib]- Rdh8[ib]-/[ib]-mice.

Reduced A2E Accumulation in mice. We studied the effect of Macuneos (BIO201) treatment on the accumulation of A2E in the retina of Abca4-/- Rdh8-/- mice. We began a three-month dosing regimen starting on mice that were 2 months of age. We observed that there was significant accumulation of A2E in vehicle Abca4-/- Rdh8-/-mice treated with placebo over three months as compared to control wild type mice at the beginning of the study, confirming a dysfunction of the visual cycle. Results demonstrated that chronic oral administration of Macuneos (BIO201) reduced A2E accumulation in the retina in treated Abca4-/- Rdh8-/-mice by approximately 45% as compared to vehicle control mice, which we believe is a key factor for maintaining visual function (Fontaine et al. PloSOne 2016).

Effects of chronic oral administration of Macuneos (BIO201) on A2E accumulation in Abca4-/—Rdh8-/—mice.

Dose-dependent protection of retina integrity in rats. In the classical blue light damage (BLD) rat model using normal albino rats, we observed that intra-peritoneal administration of Macuneos (BIO201) protected the retina in a dose-dependent manner, as measured by the number of remaining layers of photoreceptors. We demonstrated that there was an approximate 90% increase in the

78

Table of Contents

number of photoreceptors layers following the maximum dose of 100 µM of Macuneos (BIO201) as compared to the vehicle control. The results were published in PLoSONE (Fontaine et al. 2016).

Number of layers of photoreceptors in the blue light damage rat model after intraperitoneal injection of Macuneos (BIO201).

Based on this body of work, we believe that Macuneos (BIO201) may have significant clinical potential for the treatment of retinopathies, including dry AMD and Stargardt disease, and warrants continued investigation.

Macuneos (BIO201) for AMD

AMD is an age-related degeneration of the macula, the central part of the retina. It is one of the leading causes of irreversible vision loss and blindness in the people over the age of 50 worldwide, according to the BrightFocus Foundation’s Age-Related Macular Degeneration: Facts & Figures Fact Sheet. AMD affects the central part of the retina, known as the macula, which is responsible for central vision and its sharpness. There are two types of AMD:

Approximately 85 to 90% of patients with AMD suffer from the dry (atrophic) form of AMD, called dry AMD, according to estimates provided by the American Macular Degeneration Foundation. We believe that photo-oxidative and inflammatory stresses induced by the accumulation of A2E in RPE cells are the main factors responsible for the degenerative process of the retina in diseases such as AMD. We believe the biggest opportunity in treating dry AMD is preventing advancement into the later stages, GA or wet AMD, where vision loss is severe and can lead to visual disability.

79

Table of Contents

Clinical Development Plans

We are currently conducting chronic and acute rodent and non-rodent toxicology studies that we believe will be sufficient to support our IND and clinical trial applications for our MACA clinical development program. We plan to commence a Phase 1 clinical trial (MACA-PK) with BIO201 in single and multiple ascending doses in healthy volunteers to assess the safety, PK and PD, drug and food interaction of Macuneos (BIO201) in the second half of 2023, subject to regulatory review and approval, any COVID-19-related delays and the impact of the pandemic on our operational capabilities.

We also intend to investigate whether Macuneos (BIO201) may be an effective treatment for Stargardt disease, the most common form of inherited juvenile macular degeneration. The pathophysiology of Stargardt disease is linked to excessive oxidative stress and inflammation following the accumulation of lipofuscin in patients with deficiency of genes important for the visual process. A similar accumulation of Lipofuscin occurs with aging and is believed to be responsible for dry AMD. In both diseases it leads to an accelerated retinal degeneration resulting in loss of vision. Due to the similarity of the pathophysiological processes of Stargardt disease and AMD, and based on the mode of action of Macuneos, we plan to explore clinical development of Macuneos (BIO201) for Stargardt disease in 2023 following our MACA-PK Phase 1 clinical trial, subject to any COVID-19-related delays and the impact of the current pandemic on our operational capabilities.

Market Opportunity

We believe that there is market potential for Macuneos (BIO201) in dry AMD, if approved by regulatory authorities for commercial use. AMD is one of the leading causes of irreversible vision loss and blindness in people over the age of 50 worldwide, and its prevalence increases with advancing age. Based on our review of publicly available data and to our knowledge, there is currently no approved medication for dry AMD, which represents between 85 to 90% of all AMD cases according to the American Macular Degeneration Foundation, and, based on our estimates from publicly available information, affects approximately 170 million people worldwide, and is expected to increase over time as the population ages.

There are a number of companies currently developing treatments, including anti-complement or neuroprotective agents administered by intraocular injections that may treat or alter the progression of dry AMD. We believe the market for AMD will remain fragmented and will include stand-alone and combination treatments for all stages of the disease and that a large market exists for a drug that could be administered orally rather than by monthly intraocular injections. We will continue to study Macuneos (BIO201) to determine its clinical safety and effectiveness, and to explore the feasibility of oral administration, and to further explain its mode of action.

Preclinical and Discovery Pipeline

Our preclinical pipeline currently consists of Macuneos (BIO201), as well as BIO103 and BIO203, which are chemically synthesized life-cycle extension products for Sarconeos (BIO101) and Macuneos (BIO201), respectively, potentially with better pharmacological properties. We are testing these preclinical drug candidates in preclinical models for multiple age-related diseases. We plan to continue to identify new drug candidates through our drug discovery platform based on our functional assays and reverse pharmacology approach.

Competition

The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industry is characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. While we believe that our expertise in age-related diseases, scientific knowledge and intellectual property portfolio provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Not only must we compete with other companies that are focused on neuromuscular diseases and retinopathies, but any drug candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with existing therapies and new therapies that may become available in the future.

Many of our competitors may have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. 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. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and diagnostic industries may result in even more

80

Table of Contents

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.

The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our drug candidates, if approved, are likely to be their efficacy, safety, tolerability, convenience, price and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA, EMA or other national regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

The main competitors for each target indication of our drug candidates include:

Manufacturing and Supply

We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacturing of our drug candidates for both preclinical studies and all phases of clinical trials, as well as for commercial production should any of our drug candidates receive marketing approval for commercialization. We obtain key raw materials for Sarconeos (BIO101) and Macuneos (BIO201) from third-party suppliers. We are developing at the pilot and industrial scales the manufacturing processes and transfer them through agreements to third party European and American Clinical Development Manufacturing Organizations (“CDMOs”). Non GMP and GMP batches are produced in compliance with regulations for preclinical and clinical studies, including in view of the relevant guidelines adopted by the EMA,

81

Table of Contents

FDA, ANVISA and other regulatory authorities regarding the COVID-19 context. These batches allowed us to conduct all of our clinical programs. We plan to sign and signed agreements with the same and/or alternative manufacturers for industrial scale-up to submit the regulatory applications for approval and market access, subject to the global COVID-19 pandemic conditions and the impact of the current pandemic on operational capabilities. The manufacturing capacities allowed us to complete the SARA-INT clinical trial in sarcopenia and we currently have sufficient quantities to conclude COVA phase 2/3 clinical study with Sarconeos (BIO101) in COVID-19, as well as conduct the first two parts of the planned MYODA clinical trial in DMD.

Sarconeos (BIO101)

BIO101, the API of Sarconeos, is a pharmaceutical grade small molecule, 20-hydroxyecdysone (>97% purity of the active molecule). We have produced the API for preclinical and clinical development by purifying the active molecule from Cyanotis sp or Stemmacantha sp, plants cultivated in China and used for medicinal purposes in Traditional Chinese Medicine. We currently rely on one supplier for the quantities of starting material for all our studies. We have not entered into a long-term supply agreement with this supplier for commercial scale up. However, we currently have a supply agreement allowing enough quantities for our ongoing clinical programs, as well as for the manufacturing of validation and registration batches. BIO101 is purified for pharmaceutical use (>97% purity of the active molecule) using proprietary and patented processes, in compliance with GMP for pharmaceuticals, by Patheon/ThermoFisher Scientific our manufacturing partner located in Germany and Austria. We have not entered into a long-term supply agreement with Patheon/ThermoFisher. We have, by agreement, initiated the scaling-up of the manufacturing process for validation and registration batches. We believe that the supply chain we have developed over the last five years has been sufficiently scaled up, and we have already secured sufficient quantities to conduct the planned clinical trials.

We believe we can secure sufficient quantities for regulatory approval and marketing authorization for Sarconeos BIO101 in COVID-19, using our current supply chain, through scaling up production at the ThermoFisher’s sites of Linz (Austria) and Bourgoin (France) to industrial level capacity and GMP standards, subject to the impact of the current pandemic on operational capabilities. Depending on positive results of the clinical program, we will have to address significant upscaling of sourcing and manufacturing to support any commercial launch.

We are also evaluating alternative methods for producing Sarconeos (BIO101), such as new chemical synthesis or fermentation, and potential alternative plant sources, in order to optimize the supply chain to support our projected commercial needs.

Macuneos (BIO201)

BIO201, the API of Macuneos, is a pharmaceutical grade small molecule norbixin (>97% purity of the active molecule). We have produced the API for preclinical development by chemical conversion into norbixin of the natural molecule bixin, which has been previously purified from seeds of Bixa orellana L., a plant traditionally used for medicinal purposes in the Amazon. 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. The pharmaceutical development of Macuneos (BIO201) is performed by Patheon using proprietary processes. The development of the manufacturing process, the production of the technical batches, the validation of analytical methods, as well as the stability studies are currently being planned for 2021 to produce the clinical batches of Macuneos (BIO201) for the MACA-PK Phase 1 clinical trial. We are evaluating alternative methods for producing Macuneos (BIO201), such as bio fermentation, in order to optimize the supply chain to support our projected commercial needs.

Research and Collaboration Agreements with Sorbonne University and Other Academic Research Institutions

We have entered into several research and collaboration agreements with Sorbonne University and other academic research institutions (i.e., the Centre National de la Recherche Scientifique (CNRS), the Institut National de la Recherche Agronomique, or INRA, Institut National de la Santé et de la Recherche Médicale, or INSERM, and Université Paris Descartes) in order to further strengthen our research and development strategies. The purpose of these agreements is to define the terms and conditions of our research (including its financing) and the results of such research. As of the date of this annual report, three research and collaboration agreements are still in force.

The research and collaboration agreements were entered into for an initial fixed term (six to 12 months), and have each been extended by amendments as long as research is ongoing. The agreements may be terminated by any party to the agreement in the event of a breach by another party that has not been remedied within one month of a notice of the breach.

82

Table of Contents

Pursuant to the terms of the research and collaboration agreements, each of the parties to the agreements remains the owner of intellectual property it owned prior to the time of the agreement, and all parties will have equal ownership of any patents resulting from the research conducted pursuant to such agreements. The parties must jointly agree as to whether the results of research conducted pursuant to the agreement should give rise to the filing of a patent application. In the event that one party does not wish to file a patent application but another party does and agrees to bear alone the cost of such filing, it will have the right to do so and the party who declined to pursue registration of the patent will be required to assign its co-ownership interest of the patent and patent applications to the other party at no charge. For any patent application that is filed, we are responsible for managing the patent application and all intellectual property registrations in France or abroad. In the event that a party desires to assign its co-ownership interest in a patent (except in the event of an assignment between Sorbonne University and CNRS or to one of the inventors within the team dedicated to the research), the other parties to the agreement will have a preemptive right to acquire such party’s co-ownership interest. We have an option to obtain exclusive commercial rights with respect to any products developed through the parties’ research pursuant to the terms of the collaboration agreements (whether patentable or not), which the Company exercised regarding patent families S1 through S10 and patent families MI through MV and still is in a position to exercise regarding ongoing researches and other patent families. The parties may use the results of research conducted pursuant to the agreements for other research purposes, subject to informing the other parties to the agreement if such research is to be carried out in collaboration with third parties.

Pursuant to the terms of the research and collaboration agreements, once a patent is filed, the parties to such agreement enter into (i) a co-ownership agreement providing for the respective rights and obligations of the co-owners of the patents, and (ii) a commercialization/license agreement providing for our right to commercialize products based on the patents in consideration for the payment of royalties to Sorbonne University and/or the other French academic research institutions involved, as applicable, the terms of which will supersede the collaboration agreement. Until these agreements are entered into, the provisions of the collaboration agreements will continue to govern ownership of the results and the rights to commercialize any products developed through such collaborations.

As of the date of this annual report, we have a research and collaboration agreement with Sorbonne University, CNRS and INSERM “(supervisory entities of the Institut de la Vision)” dated March 2, 2020, relating to AMD for which research is currently ongoing. Our research and collaboration agreement with Sorbonne University and CNRS dated July 1, 2016, as amended on March 22, 2017, which previously governed co-ownership of patent family S6, expired when a co-ownership agreement relating to patent family S6 was entered into on October 9, 2019.

We have a research and collaboration agreement with Sorbonne University and CNRS dated February 1, 2019 (as amended) relating to heart failure associated with DMD.

We also have a research and collaboration agreement with Université Paris Descartes and SATT Ile de France Innov relating to spinal muscular atrophy for which research is currently ongoing.

Intellectual Property

We seek to protect and enhance proprietary technology, investments, and improvements that are commercially important to our business by seeking, maintaining and defending patent rights. We also seek to and will continue to rely on regulatory protection afforded through orphan drug designations, data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions where available.

Our industrial property protection policy covers our two key fields of innovation: (i) Sarconeos (BIO101) and our life-cycle extension drug candidate, BIO103, for the treatment of neuromuscular disorders, including sarcopenia spinal muscular atrophy (SMA) and DMD, respiratory function impairment resulting from a viral infection and (ii) Macuneos (BIO201) and our life-cycle extension drug candidate, BIO203, for the treatment of retinopathies, including dry AMD.

Current Intellectual Property Portfolio

Our patent portfolio covers 15 patent families, which include a total of 48 co-owned issued patents and a total of 48 co-owned patent applications. We have recently filed other patent applications that are currently under examination.

The issued patents in our portfolio consist of nine European patents, five U.S. patents, and 20 patents in other jurisdictions, including Australia, Brazil, China, Japan and Russia.

83

Table of Contents

The pending patent applications in our portfolio consist of four European patent applications, five U.S. patent applications, and 31 patent applications pending in other jurisdictions, including Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, India, Japan, Mexico, Russia and South Korea.

Our patents and patent applications are all jointly owned by us and Sorbonne, and in some cases together with other academic research institutions (i.e., CNRS, INRA and INSERM). We hold exclusive commercial rights through licenses of each of our drug candidates.

Our drug candidates rely upon one or more patent rights protecting various technologies, including rights related to:

84

Table of Contents

Individual patent terms extend for varying periods of time, depending upon the date of filing of the patent application, the date of patent issuance, and the legal term of patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file patent applications, including the United States, the patent term is 20 years from the date of filing of the first non-provisional application to which priority is claimed. In certain instances, a patent term can be extended under certain circumstances.

For example, in the United States, the term of a patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may be eligible for a patent term restoration of up to five years to effectively compensate for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process, subject to several limitations discussed below under “Our Intellectual Property Strategy.” Also, in the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office in granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier-filed patent. Similar term extension mechanism may apply for patents filed with the Office Européen des Brevets (European patent office).

Our issued patents and patent applications (if issued) will expire as follows (unless extended):

Patent family No. S1:

Patent family No. S2:

Patent family No. S3:

Patent family No. S4:

Patent family No. S5:

Patent family No. S6:

Patent family No. S7:

Patent family No. S8:

85

Table of Contents

Patent family No. S9:

Patent family No. S10

Patent family No. MI

Patent family No. MII

Patent family No. MIII

Patent family No. MIV

In China, Patent No. ZL201280066803.6 from Patent family S3 was subject to a motion for invalidation brought by a third party based on several 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. Under Chinese patent law, the invalidity of a patent may be sought by any person or entity after the grant of the patent. The patent was invalidated in China following oral proceedings before the Court of Revision of the Chinese Patent Office. The arguments in favor of the invalidation by the Court of Revision of the Chinese Patent Office were not considered as relevant objections in the context of the European examination procedure leading to the grant of a European patent on May 8, 2019 (Patent No EP2790706). However, an opposition procedure to the European patent has been started, supposedly by the same opponent as in China (the latter remaining anonymous), and is currently in progress. The corresponding oral proceedings before the European Opposition Division are expected to take place in 2021. We do not expect the potential cancellation of this patent to have any material impact on our development plans for our product candidates, our patent portfolio or our business.

If patents are issued on our pending patent applications, the resulting patents are projected to expire on dates ranging from 2027 to 2039. However, the actual protection afforded by a patent varies on a product-by-product basis, from country-to-country, and depends upon many factors, including the type of patent, the scope of its coverage, the availability of regulatory-related extensions, the availability of legal remedies in a particular country, and the validity and enforceability of the patent.

Commercialization/License Agreements

As contemplated by the various research and collaboration agreements, we have entered into two commercialization/license agreements with respect to our patents which are co-owned with Sorbonne University and/or academic research institutions : (i) a commercialization/license agreement, dated January 1, 2016 by and between us and SATT Lutech (acting as agent for CNRS, INRA and Sorbonne University) and CNRS, INRA and Sorbonne University, as amended on April 2, 2019, November 6, 2020 and

86

Table of Contents

December 17, 2020, relating to patent families S1 through S9, or the S-Commercialization Agreement, and (ii) a commercialization/license agreement, dated January 1, 2016, by and between us and SATT Lutech (acting as agent for CNRS, INSERM and Sorbonne University) and CNRS, INSERM and Sorbonne University, as amended on December 17, 2020 relating to patent families MI through MIV, or the M-Commercialization Agreement.

Unless terminated sooner, these agreements will remain in effect until the expiration or invalidation of the last of the patents covered by such agreement. The terms of the agreements provide that they will automatically terminate upon our termination of activity, wind-up and/or liquidation, a breach of the agreement, or upon a force majeure event (as described in the agreement). In addition, we may terminate these agreements upon 30 days’ notification to SATT Lutech and payment of a penalty equal to three times the annual guaranteed minimum amount, except where termination is justified by the denial of marketing authorizations.

We are required to make certain payments under the S-Commercialization Agreement and M-Commercialization Agreement as follows:

Co-Ownership Agreements

As contemplated by the various research and collaboration agreements, we have entered into 10 co-ownership agreements with Sorbonne University and/or academic research institutions, covering all of our patent families except for (i) patent family S7, which is governed by legal provisions of the French intellectual property code, which applies by default, and (ii) patent families S8 and S9, which have only recently been filed and for which we expect to enter into similar co-ownership agreements in the near future. Until such time as agreements are signed in relation to patent families S8 and S9, co-ownership will be governed by legal provisions of the French intellectual property code, which apply by default.

Each of these co-ownership agreements is entered into for a term ending upon expiration or invalidation of the last of the patents covered by such agreement, or, in the case of the co-ownership agreements covering patent families MI, MIII and MIV, until expiration or invalidation of the last of the patents covered by the agreement or as long as the commercialization/license agreement remains in effect. These agreements may be terminated if one of the parties becomes the sole owner of the patents or in the event the parties no longer own the patents. In the event that assignment to a third party is contemplated, the other parties to the agreement will have a preemptive right to acquire such party’s co-ownership share.

Intellectual Property Agreement with Stanislas Veillet

Our CEO, 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 developed inventions with us 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

87

Table of Contents

expect he will be included as a co-inventor. As an inventor, our CEO has certain rights under French intellectual property law. These rights are distinct from the statutory rights that usually apply to employee inventors under French law. In order to define a framework within which any intellectual property resulting from our CEO’s research and development activities is properly assigned to us, we have entered into an agreement with our CEO, which has been approved by our board of directors, pursuant to which he is entitled to the following payments for his contributions:

These three payments will be capped at €2.1 million on a platform per platform basis, a platform being defined in the agreement as the research and development works which cover the same family of chemical molecules targeting the same molecular receptor or biological pathway for a family of pathologies which are clinically connected.

In the event that a third-party pharmaceutical and/or biotech company acquires 100% of our capital and voting rights, payments will be accelerated, so that the cap (€2.1 million per platform), less any amount previously paid in respect of a platform, will become immediately payable.

The agreement shall remain in effect until no further payments are due. However, the provisions of this agreement will only apply to results generated during the period in which our CEO occupies the position of a corporate officer of the Company or any of its affiliates. Any party to the agreement may, upon material breach of the agreement by the other party, terminate the agreement.

Trademarks

In addition to patent protection, we have trademark protection in many countries for our name (Biophytis) and our drug candidates (in particular, “Macuneos” and “Sarconeos”). In total, we hold 42 trademarks or trademark applications. None of our trademarks are subject to a third-party license.

Our Intellectual Property Strategy

Our patent policy is to file the first priority application regionally in France, then extend that patent application for international coverage by filing a related international application through the Patent Cooperation Treaty, or PCT. The PCT international application has the potential to be pursued in 142 PCT-contracting countries.

We determine which countries to pursue patent coverage in based on our business strategy. Our business strategy focuses on two main zones in which to pursue patent coverage via the PCT: (1) Europe, and in particular, the major European countries, United States, and Japan because these countries are where most of the main major pharmaceutical companies are concentrated, and (2) the BRIC zone, which is Brazil, Russia, India, and China; and sometimes Canada, Australia and South Korea.

Our objective for this international intellectual property strategy is to secure the earliest patents in these target countries and obtain the broadest and most effective scope of intellectual property protection in these countries. In addition to protecting our innovations by patents, they often have supplemental regulatory data exclusivity in connection with the marketing authorization of our products.

Government Regulation

Government authorities in the United States (including federal, state and local authorities) and in other countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the manufacturing, research and clinical development, marketing, labeling and packaging, storage, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, advertising and promotion, pricing, and export and import of pharmaceutical products and active pharmaceutical ingredients, such as those we are developing. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals,

88

Table of Contents

authorizations, and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources.

U.S. Government Regulation

In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the FDCA and its implementing regulations. FDA approval is required before any new unapproved drug or dosage form, including a new use of a previously approved drug, can be marketed in the United States. Drugs are also subject to other federal, state and local statutes and regulations. If we fail to comply with applicable FDA or other requirements at any time during the drug development process, clinical testing, the approval process or after approval, we may become subject to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, license suspension or revocation, withdrawal of an approval, warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, placement on Import Alerts, debarment of personnel, employees or officers, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal prosecution.

The process required by the FDA before drug candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following:

An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for human studies. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product; chemistry, manufacturing and controls information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational new drug. An IND must become effective before human clinical studies may begin. An IND will automatically become effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to the proposed clinical studies. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before clinical studies can begin. Accordingly, submission of an IND may or may not result in the FDA allowing clinical studies to commence.

Clinical Studies

Clinical studies involve the administration of the investigational new drug to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, which include the requirement that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical study. Clinical studies are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the

89

Table of Contents

objectives of the study, and the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the efficacy criteria to be evaluated. A protocol for each clinical study and any subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Additionally, approval must also be obtained from each clinical study site’s IRB before the studies may be initiated, and the IRB must monitor the study until completed. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical studies and clinical study results to public registries, such as ClinicalTrials.gov.

The clinical investigation of a drug is generally divided into three or four phases. Although the phases are usually conducted sequentially, they may overlap or be combined.

A confirmatory or pivotal study is a clinical study that adequately meets regulatory agency requirements for the evaluation of a drug candidate’s efficacy and safety such that it can be used to justify the approval of the product. Generally, pivotal studies are Phase 3 studies, but the FDA may accept results from Phase 2 studies if the study design provides a well-controlled and reliable assessment of clinical benefit, particularly in situations where there is an unmet medical need and the results are sufficiently robust. In such cases, the FDA may require post-market studies for safety and efficacy to be conducted for the drug candidate. The FDA may withdraw the approval if the results indicate that the approved drug is not safe or effective.

The FDA, the IRB or the clinical study sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical study at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Additionally, some clinical studies are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical study sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group provides authorization for whether or not a study may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the study. We may also suspend or terminate a clinical study based on evolving business objectives and/or competitive climate.

Submission of an NDA to the FDA

Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, detailed investigational new drug product information is submitted to the FDA in the form of an NDA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. Under federal law, the submission of most NDAs is subject to a substantial application user fee. Applications for orphan drug products are exempted from the NDA application user fees.

An NDA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical and clinical studies, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls and proposed labeling, among other things. Data can come from company-sponsored clinical studies intended to test the safety and effectiveness of a use of a product, or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and effectiveness of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA.

Once an NDA has been submitted, the FDA’s goal is to review the application within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application relates to an unmet medical need in a serious or life-threatening indication, six months after

90

Table of Contents

the FDA accepts the application for filing. The review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification.

Before approving an NDA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP.

The FDA is required to refer an application for an investigational drug to an advisory committee or explain why such referral was not made. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, that reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the investigational product application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions and typically follows such recommendations.

The FDA’s Decision on an NDA

After the FDA evaluates the NDA and conducts inspections of manufacturing facilities, it may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete and the application is not ready for approval. A Complete Response Letter may require additional clinical data and/or an additional pivotal Phase 3 clinical study(ies), and/or other significant, expensive and time-consuming requirements related to clinical studies, preclinical studies or manufacturing. Even if such additional information is submitted, the FDA may ultimately decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. The FDA could also approve the NDA with a REMS to mitigate risks, which could include medication guides, physician communication plans or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling, development of adequate controls and specifications or a commitment to conduct one or more post- market studies or clinical studies. Such post-market testing may include Phase 4 clinical studies and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization. The FDA may have the authority to withdraw its approval if post-market testing fails to verify the approved drug’s clinical benefit, if the applicant does not perform the required testing with due diligence, or if the any other evidence demonstrates the approved drug is not safe or effective, among other reasons. Also, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our products under development.

Expedited Review, Accelerated-Approval and Emergency Use Authorization Programs

The FDA has various programs, including fast track, priority review, breakthrough therapy, accelerated approval, and regenerative medicine advanced therapy or RMAT designations that are intended to expedite the development and approval of new drugs that address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases and conditions. To be eligible for a fast track designation, the FDA must determine, based on the request of an applicant, that a product is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address an unmet medical need. The FDA may review sections of the NDA for a fast-track product on a rolling basis before the complete application is submitted. If the applicant provides a schedule for the submission of the sections of the NDA, the FDA agrees to accept sections of the NDA and determines that the schedule is acceptable. The applicant pays any required user fees upon submission of the first section of the NDA.

The FDA may give a priority review designation to drugs that offer major advances in treatment, or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. A priority review designation means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review of ten months. These six and ten-month review periods are measured from the “filing” date rather than the receipt date for NDAs for new molecular entities, which typically adds approximately two months to the timeline for review and decision from the date of submission. Products that are eligible for fast-track designation are also likely to be considered appropriate to receive a priority review.

In addition, products studied for their safety and effectiveness in treating serious or life-threatening illnesses and that provide meaningful therapeutic benefit over existing treatments may be eligible for accelerated approval and may be approved on the basis of adequate and well-controlled clinical studies establishing that the product has an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. This evaluation takes into account

91

Table of Contents

the severity, rarity or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval to perform post-marketing studies to verify and describe the predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical endpoint, and the drug may be subject to accelerated withdrawal procedures.

Moreover, under the provisions of the Food and Drug Administration Safety and Innovation Act passed in July 2012, a sponsor can request designation of a drug candidate as a “breakthrough therapy.” A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development.

Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies are also eligible for priority review and fast track designation. As part of this process, the FDA takes certain actions, such as holding timely meetings and providing advice, intended to expedite the development and review of an application for approval of a breakthrough therapy.

In addition, the 21^st Century Cures Act in 2016 made the Regenerative Medicine Advanced Therapy, or RMAT, designation available for investigational drugs that are regenerative medicine therapies intended to treat, modify, reverse, or cure a serious condition, with preliminary clinical evidence indicating that the drug has the potential for addressing unmet medical needs for such condition. The RMAT designation is available for cell therapy, therapeutic tissue engineering products, human cell and tissue products, and combination products that use such therapies or products. The advantages of RMAT designation include those of breakthrough and fast track designations, such as early interactions with the FDA and rolling review of applications, and the drug candidate with the RMAT designation may be eligible for accelerated approval. Requests for RMAT designations should be made with the IND application (if preliminary clinical evidence is available), but no later than the end-of-Phase-2 meeting.

Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or decide that the time period for the FDA review or approval will not be shortened or will be withdrawn.

With the declaration of COVID-19 as a worldwide pandemic and public health emergency, several programs have been utilized, to expedite review of medications. These include:

Post-Approval Requirements

Drugs marketed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, advertising and promotion and reporting of adverse experiences with the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new

92

Table of Contents

indications or other labeling claims are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing, annual user fee requirements.

Manufacturers are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by FDA and state agencies for compliance with cGMP requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon us and any third- party manufacturers that we may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance.

Discovery of previously unknown problems with a product or the failure to comply with applicable requirements may result in restrictions on a product, manufacturer or holder of an approved NDA, including withdrawal or recall of the product from the market or other voluntary, FDA-initiated or judicial action that could delay or prohibit further marketing. Also, new government requirements, including those resulting from new legislation, may be established, or the FDA’s policies may change, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of our products under development.

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

The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability.

It is expected that, with respect to COVID-19-related EUA programs, data collection post-approval will be required, either in the form of a clinical trial, or by other methods (e.g. real-world data). Several anti-viral agents, for example Paxlovid (nirmatrelvir and ritonavir), and molnupiravir) as well as monoclonal antibodies (sotrovimab and Evusheld (tixagevimab co-packaged with cilgavimab and administered together)) have already received emergency use authorizations in the United States for specific indications and patient groups,.

Orphan Designation and Exclusivity

Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, defined as a disease or condition with a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States and when there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available the drug in the United States will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting a BLA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA.

93

Table of Contents

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for a particular active ingredient for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product marketing exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity or if the FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can assure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Orphan drug exclusivity does not prevent the FDA from approving a different drug for the same disease or condition, or the same drug for a different disease or condition.

Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the NDA application user fee.

A designated orphan drug many not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, orphan drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or, as noted above, if the second applicant demonstrates that its product is clinically superior to the approved product with orphan exclusivity or the manufacturer of the approved product is unable to assure sufficient quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition.

Hatch-Waxman Amendments and Exclusivity

Section 505 of the FDCA describes three types of marketing applications that may be submitted to the FDA to request marketing authorization for a new drug. A Section 505(b)(1) NDA is an application that contains full reports of investigations of safety and efficacy. A 505(b)(2) NDA is an application that contains full reports of investigations of safety and efficacy but where at least some of the information required for approval comes from investigations that were not conducted by or for the applicant and for which the applicant has not obtained a right of reference or use from the person by or for whom the investigations were conducted. This regulatory pathway enables the applicant to rely, in part, on the FDA’s prior findings of safety and efficacy for an existing product, or published literature, in support of its application. Section 505(j) establishes an abbreviated approval process for a generic version of approved drug products through the submission of an ANDA. An ANDA provides for marketing of a generic drug product that has the same active ingredients, dosage form, strength, route of administration, labeling, performance characteristics and intended use, among other things, to a previously approved product. ANDAs are termed “abbreviated” because they are generally not required to include preclinical (animal) and clinical (human) data to establish safety and efficacy. Instead, generic applicants must scientifically demonstrate that their product is bioequivalent to, or performs in the same manner as, the innovator drug through in vitro, in vivo or other testing. The generic version must deliver the same amount of active ingredients into a subject’s bloodstream in the same amount of time as the innovator drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the reference listed drug. In seeking approval for a drug through an NDA, applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent with claims that cover the applicant’s drug or a method of using the drug. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential competitors in support of approval of an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA.

Upon submission of an ANDA or a 505(b)(2) NDA, an applicant must certify to the FDA that (1) no patent information on the drug product that is the subject of the application has been submitted to the FDA; (2) such patent has expired; (3) the date on which such patent expires; or (4) such patent is invalid or will not be infringed upon by the manufacture, use or sale of the drug product for which the application is submitted. Generally, the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA cannot be approved until all listed patents have expired, except where the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant challenges a listed patent through the last type of certification, also known as a paragraph IV certification. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents, or indicates that it is not seeking approval of a patented method of use, the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA application will not be approved until all of the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired.

If the ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the application has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the paragraph IV certification. If the paragraph IV certification is challenged by an NDA holder or the patent owner(s) asserts a patent challenge to the paragraph IV certification, the FDA may not approve that application until the earlier of 30 months from the receipt of the notice of the paragraph IV certification, the expiration of the patent, when the infringement case concerning each such patent was favorably decided in the applicant’s favor or settled, or such shorter or longer period as may be ordered by a court. This prohibition is generally referred to as the 30-month stay. In instances where an ANDA or 505(b)(2) NDA applicant files a paragraph IV certification, the NDA holder

94

Table of Contents

or patent owner(s) regularly take action to trigger the 30-month stay, recognizing that the related patent litigation may take many months or years to resolve.

The FDA also cannot approve an ANDA or 505(b)(2) application until all applicable non-patent exclusivities listed in the Orange Book for the branded reference drug have expired. For example, a pharmaceutical manufacturer may obtain five years of non-patent exclusivity upon NDA approval of a new chemical entity, or NCE, which is a drug containing an active moiety that has not been approved by the FDA in any other NDA. An “active moiety” is defined as the molecule responsible for the drug substance’s physiological or pharmacologic action. During that five-year exclusivity period, the FDA cannot accept for filing (and therefore cannot approve) any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug or any 505(b)(2) NDA that relies on the FDA’s approval of the drug, provided that that the FDA may accept an ANDA four years into the NCE exclusivity period if the ANDA applicant also files a Paragraph IV certification.

A drug, including one approved under Section 505(b)(2), may obtain a three-year period of exclusivity for a particular condition of approval, or change to a marketed product, such as a new formulation for a previously approved product, if one or more new clinical studies (other than bioavailability or bioequivalence studies) was essential to the approval of the application and was conducted/sponsored by the applicant. Should this occur, the FDA would be precluded from approving any ANDA or 505(b)(2) application for the protected modification until after that three-year exclusivity period has run. However, unlike NCE exclusivity, the FDA can accept an application and begin the review process during the exclusivity period.

Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements

U.S. pharmaceutical companies are subject to additional healthcare regulation and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which they conduct their business. Such laws include, without limitation, state and federal anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, false claims, privacy and security and physician sunshine laws and regulations. If pharmaceutical company operations are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other applicable governmental regulations, these companies may be subject to penalties, including, without limitation, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, the curtailment or restructuring of operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs and individual imprisonment.

Coverage and Reimbursement

Sales of any product depend, in part, on the extent to which such product will be covered by third-party payors, such as federal, state and foreign government healthcare programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations and the level of third-party reimbursement for such product. Third-party payor decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided are made on a plan-by-plan basis. These third-party payors often reduce reimbursements for medical products, drugs and services. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on coverage and reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit sales of any product. Decreases in third-party reimbursement for any product or a decision by a third-party payor not to cover a product could reduce physician usage and patient demand for the product and also has a material adverse effect on sales. Even after the FDA approves a product, for example, the failure to obtain third-party payor coverage may impose a material adverse effect on sales. As federal and state governments continue to promulgate new policies and regulations, these policies and regulations may also impose a material adverse effect on sales. These laws and regulations may restrict, prohibit, or preventing us from implementing a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing, promotion, sales commission, incentive programs, and other business activities. No uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement among third-party payors exists in the United States. Finally, although payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy establishing their coverage and reimbursement policies. Instead, each payor makes independent and separate decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided.

Healthcare Reform

In March 2010, former President Obama signed the Affordable Care Act, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers in the United States, and significantly affected the pharmaceutical industry. The Affordable Care Act contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollments in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement adjustments and fraud and abuse changes. Additionally, the Affordable Care Act increases the minimum level of Medicaid rebates payable by manufacturers of brand name drugs from 15.1% to 23.1%; requires collection of rebates for drugs paid by Medicaid managed care organizations; requires manufacturers to participate in a coverage gap discount program, under which they

95

Table of Contents

must agree to offer 50% point-of- sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; and imposes a non-deductible annual fee on pharmaceutical manufacturers or importers who sell “branded prescription drugs” to specified federal government programs.

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. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted, including aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year for certain Medicare providers and suppliers, and further reduced payments to several types of Medicare providers.

Moreover, there has recently been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical 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, proposing to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing.

CARES Act

In March 2020, the United States Congress passed the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security, or CARES, Act, a $2 trillion relief package created in response to the ongoing COVID-19 pandemic in the United States. Although Congress directed a significant portion of CARES Act aid to health care providers and institutions that serve on the “front line” of the COVID-19 crisis, Congress also allocated $940 million to the NIH, the U.S. government’s primary agency responsible for biomedical research. Additionally, for companies that engage in research studies that involve routine costs payable by federal health care programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, the CARES Act includes a number of measures designed to ease restrictions, enhance coverage, or even accelerate reimbursement for those routine costs in limited circumstances. Although CARES Act financial aid and easing of restrictions are specifically intended to address the COVID-19 emergency and are thus generally temporary, the sheer size and breadth of relief opportunities afforded under the law could positively impact life science and biotechnology companies’ growth in the long term (i.e., even beyond the pandemic), particularly for early stage companies engaged in COVID-19 related research.

Foreign Corrupt Practices Act

Our business activities may be subject to the FCPA and similar anti-bribery or anti-corruption laws, regulations or rules of other countries in which we operate. The FCPA generally prohibits offering, promising, giving, or authorizing others to give anything of value, either directly or indirectly, to a non-U.S. government official in order to influence official action, or otherwise obtain or retain business. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. Our business is heavily regulated and therefore involves significant interaction with public officials, including officials of non-U.S. governments. Additionally, in many other countries, the health care providers who prescribe pharmaceuticals are employed by their government, and the purchasers of pharmaceuticals are government entities; therefore, our dealings with these prescribers and purchasers are subject to regulation under the FCPA. There is no certainty that all of our employees, agents, suppliers, manufacturers, contractors, or collaborators, or those of our affiliates, will comply with all applicable laws and regulations, particularly given the high level of complexity of these laws. Violations of these laws and regulations could result in fines, criminal sanctions against us, our officers, or our employees, the closing down of facilities, including those of our suppliers and manufacturers, requirements to obtain export licenses, cessation of business activities in sanctioned countries, implementation of compliance programs, and prohibitions on the conduct of our business. Any such violations could include prohibitions on our ability to offer our products in one or more countries as well as difficulties in manufacturing or continuing to develop our products, and could materially damage our reputation, our brand, our international expansion efforts, our ability to attract and retain employees, and our business, prospects, operating results, and financial condition.

96

Table of Contents

European Union Drug Development

In the European Union, our drug candidates may also be subject to extensive regulatory requirements. As in the United States, medicinal products can only be marketed if a marketing authorization from the competent regulatory agencies has been obtained.

Similar to the United States, the various phases of preclinical and clinical research in the European Union are subject to significant regulatory controls. Clinical trials of medicinal products in the European Union must be conducted in accordance with European Union, national regulations and international standards for GCP, as well as in accordance with the new guidelines of the EMA and of the relevant national regulatory authorities regarding the COVID-19 context.

Clinical trials are currently governed by EU Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC that set out common rules for the control and authorization of clinical trials in the European Union, as well as by the GCP Directive 2005/28/EC.

To improve the current system, Regulation (EU) No 536/2014 on clinical trials on medicinal products for human use (“Clinical Trials Regulation”) was adopted in 2014 and will apply as from January 31, 2022. The Clinical Trials Regulation aims at harmonizing and streamlining the clinical trials authorization process, simplifying adverse event reporting procedures, improving the supervision of clinical trials, and increasing their transparency, notably via a clinical trial information system set up by the EMA. The Clinical Trials Regulation applies as from January 31, 2022. The Clinical Trials Regulation allows to still start and conduct a clinical trial in accordance with Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC during a transitional period of one year after application date (so until January 31, 2023). Clinical trials authorized under the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC can continue to be conducted under the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC until January 31, 2025. An application to transition ongoing trials from the Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC to the Clinical Trials Regulation will need to be submitted and authorized before the end of the transitional period on January 31, 2025.

Under the current regime, before a clinical trial can be initiated it must be approved in each of the EU Member States where the trial is to be conducted by two distinct bodies: the National Competent Authority, or NCA, and one or more Ethics Committees, or ECs. Under the current regime all suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions, or SUSARs, to the investigated drug that occur during the clinical trial have to be reported to the NCA and ECs of the Member State where they occurred. The Directive also imposes an obligation of periodic notification so as to inform the EC of the progress of the clinical trial.

European Union Drug Review and Approval

In the EEA (which is comprised of the 27 (after the Brexit) Member States of the European Union plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein), medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a Marketing Authorization, or MA. MAs may be granted either centrally (Community MA) or nationally (National MA).

The Community MA is issued centrally by the European Commission through the Centralized Procedure, based on the opinion of the CHMP of the EMA and is valid throughout the entire territory of the EU and will be recognized in the other EEA Member States Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein. The Centralized Procedure is mandatory for certain types of products such as orphan medicinal products and medicinal products containing a new active substance indicated for the treatment of neurodegenerative disorders. The Centralized Procedure is optional for products containing a new active substance not yet authorized in the EEA, or for products that constitute a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation or which are in the interest of public health in the European Union.

The European Commission may also grant a “conditional marketing authorization” prior to obtaining the comprehensive clinical data required for an application for a full marketing authorization. Such conditional marketing authorizations may be granted for product candidates (including medicines designated as orphan medical products), if:

97

Table of Contents

A conditional marketing authorization may contain specific obligations to be fulfilled by the marketing authorization holder including obligations with respect to the completion of ongoing or new studies, and with respect to the collection of pharmacoviligance data. Conditional marketing authorizations are valid for one year, and may be renewed annually, if the risk-benefit balance remains positive, and after an assessment of the need for additional or modified conditions and/or specific obligations.

National MAs are issued nationally by the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA and only cover their respective territory. National MAs are available for products not falling within the mandatory scope of the Centralized Procedure. We do not foresee that any of our current drug candidates will be suitable for a National MA as they fall within the mandatory criteria for the Centralized Procedure. Therefore, our drug candidates will be approved through Community MAs.

Under the above-described procedures, before granting the MA, the EMA or the competent authorities of the Member States of the EEA make an assessment of the risk-benefit balance of the product on the basis of scientific criteria concerning its quality, safety and efficacy.

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 1901/2006, or the “Pediatric Regulation”, all applications for marketing authorization for new medicines, as well as all applications for new indications of approved medicines, must include to be valid, in addition to the particulars and documents referred to in Directive 2001/83/EC, the results of all studies performed and details of all information collected in compliance with a pediatric investigation plan agreed between regulatory authorities and the applicant, unless the medicine is exempt because of a deferral or waiver of the EMA.

Before the EMA is able to begin its assessment of a Community MA application, it will validate that the applicant has complied with the agreed pediatric investigation plan. The applicant and the EMA may, where such a step is adequately justified, agree to modify a pediatric investigation plan to assist validation. Modifications are not always possible; may take longer to agree than the period of validation permits; and may still require the applicant to withdraw its marketing authorization application and to conduct additional non-clinical and clinical studies. Products that are granted a MA on the basis of the pediatric clinical trials conducted in accordance with the Pediatric Investigation Plan, or PIP, are eligible for a six-month extension of the protection under a supplementary protection certificate (if any is in effect at the time of approval) or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of the orphan market exclusivity. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when data in compliance with the PIP are developed and submitted.

Orphan Drugs

In the European Union, Regulation (EC) No 141/2000 of the European Parliament and of the Council of December 16, 1999 on orphan medicinal products, as amended, states that a drug shall be designated as an orphan drug if its sponsor can establish that the three following cumulative conditions are met:

Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 of April 27, 2000 laying down the provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product and definitions of the concepts “similar medicinal product” and “clinical superiority”, an application for the designation of a drug as an orphan drug must be submitted at any stage of development of the drug before filing of a MA application.

98

Table of Contents

The European Union offers incentives to encourage the development of designated orphan medicines (protocol assistance, fee reductions, etc.) and provides opportunities for market exclusivity. Pursuant to abovementioned Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000, products receiving orphan designation in the European Union can obtain market exclusivity for a certain number of years in the European Union following the marketing approval.

If a Community MA in respect of an orphan drug is granted, regulatory authorities will not, for a period of usually ten years, accept another application for a MA, or grant a MA or accept an application to extend an existing MA, for the same therapeutic indication, in respect of a similar drug. This period may however be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established, in respect of the drug concerned, that the above-mentioned criteria for orphan drug designation are no longer met, in other words, when it is shown on the basis of available evidence that the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity.

Pursuant to Regulation No. 1901/2006, for orphan medicinal products, instead of an extension of the supplementary protection certificate, the ten-year period of orphan market exclusivity should be extended to 12 years if the requirement for data on use in the pediatric population is fully met (i.e. when the request contains the results of all studies carried out under the approved PIP and when the declaration attesting the conformity of the request to this PIP is included in the MA).

Notwithstanding the foregoing, a MA may be granted, for the same therapeutic indication, to a similar drug if:

The abovementioned Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000 provides for other incentives regarding orphan medicinal products.

Post-Approval Controls

The holder of a MA must comply with EU requirements applicable to manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. In particular, the holder of the MA must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint a Qualified Person Responsible for Pharmacovigilance, or QPPV, who is responsible for oversight of that system and who will reside and operate in the EU. Key obligations include safety expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports, or PSURs.

All new MAs must include a risk management plan, or RMP, to submit to the EMA, describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. Such risk-minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies. RMPs and PSURs are routinely available to third parties requesting access, subject to limited redactions. All advertising and promotional activities for the product must be consistent with the approved summary of product characteristics, and therefore all off-label promotion is prohibited. Direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicines is also prohibited in the European Union. Although general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products are established under EU directives, the details are governed by regulations in each EU Member State and can differ from one country to another.

Reimbursement

The European Union provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. A Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. For example, in France, effective market access will be supported by agreements with hospitals and products may be reimbursed by the Social Security Fund. The price of medicines covered by national health insurance is negotiated with the French Economic Committee for Health Products, or CEPS. There can be no

99

Table of Contents

assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our drug candidates.

Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower.

Other European Regulatory Matters

French Regulatory Framework for Clinical Development

In France, Directive No. 2001/20/EC has been implemented in French national law, establishing a system of prior authorization and requiring a prior favorable opinion from an ethics committee.

Parties to a CTA must use a CTA template (“unique agreement” or convention unique) to organize the conduct of interventional clinical trials with commercial purpose, as well as specific template exhibits to this agreement. The use of the unique agreement template is mandatory if the research takes place in a public health establishment, institution (“maison de sante”), or centre (“centre de sante”) in France. Once concluded, the CTA is communicated for information by the sponsor to the French national board of physicians (Ordre national des médecins) without delay.

The processing of personal data, including health data, collected during clinical trials has to comply with the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 of the European Parliament and of the Council of April 27, 2016 and Law No 2018-493 of June 20, 2018 on the protection of personal data, implementing the Regulation (EU) 2016/679 requirements, as well as the guidelines of the French data protection authority, the Commission Nationale de l’Informatique et des Libertés, or CNIL. Regarding automatic processing operations for the purpose of research or clinical studies, formalities have to be completed before the CNIL, so as to obtain the authorization to process personal data. However, there are simplified standards.

Law No. 2011-2012 of December 29, 2011, or Loi Bertrand, aimed at strengthening the health safety of medicinal and health products, as amended (and its implementing decrees), introduced into French law provisions regarding transparency of fees received by some healthcare professionals from health product industries, i.e. companies manufacturing or marketing health products (Article L.1453-1 of the French Public Health Code). The French Decree No. 2016-1939 of December 28, 2016 clarifies that companies manufacturing or marketing health care products (medicinal products, medical devices, etc.) in France shall publicly disclose (mainly on a specific public website available at: https://www.entreprises-transparence.sante.gouv.fr) the advantages and fees paid to healthcare professionals amounting to €10 or above, as well as the agreements concluded with the latter, along with detailed information about each agreement (the precise subject matter of the agreement, the date of signature of the agreement, its end date, the total amount paid to the healthcare professional, etc.). Another declaration must also be filed to the competent healthcare professional body. Several decrees have further extended the scope of these declarations. For instance, under Decree No. 2019-1530 of December 30, 2019, companies will also have to disclose agreements concluded with persons who present one or more health products in the media or social networks in such a way as to influence the public.

Law No. 2011-2012 also reinforced the French anti-gift rules. Further to subsequent modifications in 2017 and 2019, new Articles L. 1453-3 et seq. of the French Public Health Code amended the Anti-Gift regime and expanded the scope of the general prohibition of payments from pharmaceutical and device manufacturers to healthcare professionals to broadly cover any company manufacturing or marketing health products, regardless of whether or not payment for the products is reimbursed under the French social security system (new Articles L. 1453-3 et seq. of the French Public Health Code). Derogation must be submitted to the relevant healthcare professional body. Moreover, the penalties incurred for non-compliance with the requirements of the Anti-Gift regime by a healthcare company may lead to a fine of up to €750,000.

French Pharmaceutical Company Status

In France, there is a regulated status of pharmaceutical establishment and operating company, which allows us to manufacture and market drug candidates. Obtaining a pharmaceutical establishment license, either as a distributor or as a manufacturer requires the submission of an application file to the ANSM. The application package will vary depending on the type of application (distribution license or manufacturing license). The ANSM grants such license after verifying that the company has adequate premises, the necessary personnel and adequate procedures to carry out the proposed pharmaceutical activities.

100

Table of Contents

C.Organizational Structure

We lease approximately 504 square meters of office space at Sorbonne University—BC 9, Bâtiment A 4ème étage, 4 place Jussieu, 75005 Paris, France for research and development and administrative activities. The lease agreement (convention d’occupation du domaine public) provides for a one-year renewable term. We incurred annual lease expense of €173 thousand for the year 2021. We believe that our existing facility is adequate to meet our current needs, and that suitable additional alternative spaces will be available in the future on commercially reasonable terms.

101

Table of Contents

Research and Development Expenses

Our research and development expenses consist primarily of costs incurred in connection with the development of our drug candidates, including:

To date, we have expensed all research and development costs as incurred, as we do not currently meet the conditions to capitalize expenditures on drug development activities, as provided in IAS 38 Intangible Assets.

Clinical development expenses for our drug candidates are a significant component of our current research and development expenses as we advance our drug candidates into and through clinical trials. Drug candidates in later stage clinical development generally have higher research and development costs than those in earlier stages of development, primarily due to increased size and duration of the clinical trials. We recognize costs for each grant project, preclinical study or clinical trial that we conduct based on our evaluation of the progress to completion, using information and data provided to us by our research and development vendors and clinical sites.

We expect our research and development expenses to increase for the foreseeable future as we progress our drug candidates into and through clinical trials. Furthermore, to the extent we undertake to commercialize any drug candidates approved or authorized for any indication for sale, our expenses will likely increase even more. The process of conducting the necessary clinical research to obtain regulatory approval or authorization of a drug candidate is costly and time consuming. We will require additional funding, beyond the proceeds raised in our U.S. initial public offering, to fund our continuing operations. The probability that any of our drug candidates receives regulatory approval or authorization and eventually is able to generate revenue depends on a variety of factors, including the quality of our drug candidates, early clinical data, investment in our clinical program and further clinical validation, competition, manufacturing capability and commercial viability. We may never succeed in obtaining regulatory approval or authorization for any of our drug candidates. As a result of these uncertainties, we are unable to determine the duration and completion costs of our research and development projects or if, when and to what extent we will generate revenue from the commercialization and sale of any of our drug candidates, if approved or authorized.

General and Administrative Expenses

General and administrative expenses include personnel costs, costs for outside professional services and other allocated expenses. Personnel costs consist of salaries, bonuses, benefits, travel and share-based compensation. Outside professional services consist of legal, accounting and audit services, commercial evaluation and strategy services, and other consulting services. We expect general and administrative expenses to increase in the near future with the expansion of our staff and management team to include new personnel responsible for finance, legal, information technology and later, sales and business development functions. We also expect to incur additional general and administrative costs as a result of operating as a U.S. public company, including expenses related to compliance with the rules and regulations of the SEC and those of any national securities exchange on which our securities are traded, additional insurance expense, investor relations activities and other administrative and professional services. We also expect to incur additional expenses related to in-licenses, acquisitions or similar transactions that we may pursue as part of our strategy, including legal, accounting and audit services and other consulting fees.

102

Table of Contents

Net Financial Income (Expense)

Net financial income (expense) includes amortized cost of the reimbursable advances, amortized cost of non-convertible bonds and of the debt component of the convertible notes issued to Kreos Capital, change in fair value on derivative financial instruments related to the conversion option of the convertible notes issued to Kreos Capital and related to the warrants issued to Kreos Capital, fair value adjustments on convertible notes issued to NEGMA and ATLAS, the amortization of the day one losses related to the warrants attached to the convertible notes and to the debt component of the convertible notes issued to Kreos, other financial income and expense, the net financial income related to NEGMA returning to us cash settlement related to contractual terms in relation with the NEGMA litigation (as described in further detail in the paragraph “Results of Operations” below and in Note 12.2.1 to the audited consolidated financial statements), the financial indemnity paid to NEGMA in 2021 (as described in further detail in the paragraph “Results of Operations” below and in Note 13.2.1 to the audited consolidated financial statements) and foreign exchange gains and losses.

COVID-19 Impact

We have, like many other companies, experienced disruptions due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Although the COVID-19 pandemic appears to be gradually subsiding, given the rapid changes associated with COVID-19, we have and are continuing to take the necessary precautions to protect our employees, partners and operations. For example, we allow our employees to work from home on average two days a week and organize meetings and events in a virtual way whenever possible. We have also imposed restrictions on travel, which is now limited to professional imperatives only.

Our clinical studies have been impacted by COVID-19. Our SARA-INT trial in sarcopenia was impacted by the emergence of COVID-19 and lockdowns in Belgium and several American states (California and New York in particular). In light of the various measures adopted by governments and health authorities to restrict movement and protect the safety of patients, we had to adapt our SARA-INT protocol in order to ensure the continuity of the trial, in particular by closing all on-site activities, replacing them by phone calls, organizing Investigational Product delivery to patients’ homes, and expanding the treatment from six to nine months for some patients. Despite these interruptions of in-office study visits and other disruptions, we were able to retain most of the study participants, and a total of 203 participants completed the SARA-INT study. The last patient completed his final on-treatment visit in December 2020. However only 106 patients could perform the 400m walk test, which was the primary endpoint of our study.

In addition, our MYODA program in DMD and MACA program for dry AMD planned for 2022 and 2023, respectively, could be delayed if new lockdowns or other restrictions are put in place as a result of a resurgence of COVID-19 or emergence of new vaccine resistant strains.

Patient recruitment for our COVA trial to treat COVID-19 patients has ended earlier than planned as a result of the evolution of the pandemic. Due to a lack of subjects meeting enrollment criteria, we have decided to stop enrollment in the COVA study with immediate effect and we plan to obtain topline results after the end of the 28-day treatment period during the second quarter of 2022 and complete results in the third quarter of 2022.

Critical Accounting Policies and Significant Judgments And Estimates

Our audited consolidated financial statements have been prepared in accordance with IFRS, as issued by the IASB. Some of the accounting methods and policies used in preparing our financial statements under IFRS are based on complex and subjective assessments by our management or on estimates based on past experience and assumptions deemed realistic and reasonable based on the circumstances. The actual value of our assets, liabilities and shareholders’ equity and of our losses could differ from the value derived from these estimates if conditions change and these changes have an impact on the assumptions adopted. We believe that the most significant management judgments and assumptions in the preparation of our financial statements are described below. See Note 2.3 to our audited consolidated financial statements as of December 31, 2020 and 2021 and for each of the three years ended December 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021.

Founders’ warrants and warrants granted to employees and executives

The fair value measurement of share-based payments is based on the Black-Scholes option valuation model, which makes assumptions about complex and subjective variables. These variables notably include the value of our shares, the expected volatility of the share price over the lifetime of the instrument, and the present and future behavior of holders of those instruments. There is a high

103

Table of Contents

inherent risk of subjectivity when using an option valuation model to measure the fair value of share-based payments in accordance with IFRS 2 Share-based Payment.

Convertible Notes and Non-Convertible Bonds

During the year ended December 31, 2019, we issued non-convertible bonds to Kreos and notes convertible into ordinary shares and/or redeemable for cash with warrants attached to NEGMA.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, we issued notes convertible into ordinary shares and/or redeemable for cash to ATLAS.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, we issued notes convertible into ordinary shares and/or redeemable for cash to ATLAS and non-convertible bonds, convertible notes and warrants to Kreos Capital.

In accordance with IFRS 9 Financial Instruments, we measured the fair value of the convertible notes issued to NEGMA and ATLAS based on a binomial valuation model, which makes assumptions about complex and subjective variables. These variables notably include the value of our shares, the expected volatility of the share price over the lifetime of the instrument, and the assumed present and future behavior (including estimated timing of exercise, conversion and other decisions) of holders of those instruments. There is a high inherent risk of subjectivity when using an option valuation model to measure the fair value of financial instruments and equity instruments in accordance with IAS 32 Financial Instruments: presentation, and IFRS 9 Financial Instruments.

In accordance with IFRS 9 Financial Instruments, convertible notes issued to NEGMA and ATLAS were measured at fair value on the date of issuance (based on a binomial valuation model) with recognition of the changes in fair value in the consolidated statement of operations. At issuance date, a day one loss has been recognized in financial expense for the difference between the fair value of the convertible notes and the nominal value of the debt adjusted of the equity instruments related to the attached warrants (if any).

The warrants issued to NEGMA in 2019 and KREOS in 2018 are recognized at fair value at the issuance date through equity in accordance with IFRS 9 Financial Instruments.

In accordance with IFRS 9 Financial Instruments, the convertible notes issued to Kreos Capital with warrants were considered as an hybrid contract with a debt component and derivative instruments related to the conversion option and the warrants.

The convertible notes were initially recognized at fair value (based on the black&scholes valuation model) and subsequently bifurcated in a debt component recorded at amortized cost and a derivative instrument recorded at fair value through profit or loss. The Company determined that the fair value of the convertible notes and warrants on initial recognition differs from the transation price. A day one loss has been recognized at issuance date as a separate asset under other non-current financial asset line item and is amortized over the maturity of the instruments.

Due to contractual clauses, the Company determined that the warrants could not be settled in all circumstances by the exchange of a fixed amount of cash for a fixed number of the Company’s own equity instrument. As a result, the warrants issued to KREOS in November 2021 at the same time as the loan arrangement with Kreos have been considered as derivative instruments recorded at fair value through profit or loss. Subsequent changes in fair value of the warrants are recognized in the statement of consolidated operations in accordance with IFRS 9 Financial Instruments.

The warrants issued to Kreos in 2018 were initially recognized as equity instruments. By subscribing to the 2021 warrants, Kreos Capital has expressly waived the right to exercise the 2018 warrants. As a result, the 2018 warrants were measured at fair value (based on the Black-Scholes valuation model) on November 19, 2021 and recognized as a reduction of equity.

Non-recognition of deferred tax assets net of deferred tax liabilities

The determination of the amount of deferred tax assets which can be recognized requires management to make estimates on both the period in which tax losses carried forward will be realizable, and the level of future taxable income.

As of December 31, 2019, 2020 and 2021, no deferred tax asset has been recognized in our financial statements except as a result of the expected taxable income to be derived from deferred tax liabilities.

104

Table of Contents

We recognized in 2019:

No deferred tax liability nor deferred tax assets were recognized in 2020 and in 2021.

The JOBS Act

As an “emerging growth company” under the JOBS Act, we can take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards. This allows an “emerging growth company” to delay the adoption of certain accounting standards until those standards would otherwise apply to private companies. We will not take advantage of the extended transition period provided under Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act for complying with new or revised accounting standards. Since IFRS makes no distinction between public and private companies for purposes of compliance with new or revised accounting standards, the requirements for our compliance as a private company and as a public company are the same.

We are in the process of evaluating the benefits of relying on other exemptions and reduced reporting requirements under the JOBS Act. Subject to certain conditions, as an “emerging growth company”, we intend to rely on certain of these exemptions including, without limitation, the exemptions from providing an auditor’s attestation report on our system of internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We will remain an “emerging growth company” until the earliest of: (1) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have total annual gross revenues of $1.07 billion or more; (2) the last day of the fiscal year following the fifth anniversary of the closing date of our U.S. initial public offering; (3) the date on which we have issued more than $1 billion in non-convertible debt during the previous three years; and (4) the date on which we are deemed to be a large accelerated filer under the rules of the SEC.

105

Table of Contents

Personnel costs, including stock-based payments for engineers and research personnel, were €2,553 thousand and €4,392 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively. The increase in personnel expenses in 2021 compared to 2020 was related to the staff reinforcement as part of the COVA clinical study and expenses relating to share-based payment for €2,125 thousand in 2021 compared to €367 thousand in 2020.

Purchases and external expenses related to our research activity were €10,459 thousand and €19,345 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively. The increase in purchases and external expenses related to our studies and research costs was primarily related to the progression of our COVA Phase 2-3 study as well as to the finalization for results publication of our SARA-INT phase 2 study. These expenses consisted primarily of the cost of CROs in conducting clinical trials and non-clinical studies, as well as the costs of CDMOs for the manufacturing scaling-up of Sarconeos (BIO101) in preparation of a potential filing with Regulatory Authorities upon positive results from COVA.

We have benefited from the Research Tax Credit (CIR) since our incorporation. The CIR amounted to €3,328 thousand and €4,080 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively. In December 2020, a portion of the CIR receivable for 2020 was prefinanced by the FONDS COMMUN DE TITRISATION PREDIREC INNOVATION 2020 with NEFTYS CONSEIL SARL as arranger, or NEFTYS. In December 2021, a portion of the CIR 2021 receivable (€3,450 thousand) was prefinanced by NEFTYS.

As part of the BPI France conditional advance for the “BIO 201” project, the Company was entitled to receive a grant of €380 thousand, of which €202 thousand was recognized as a subsidy in 2021 since 53% of the budget of research and development expenses were incurred at the closing date.

Personnel costs, including share-based payments, for general management and administrative staff were €1,796 thousand and €2,836 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively. This increase was mainly due to the reinforcement of the Company’s staff, mostly for Business Development and Sox Compliance, as well as to the impact of the stock based compensation expense related to Founders’ warrants and free shares granted in late 2020 and in 2021.

Purchases and external expenses were €2,188 thousand and €3,991 thousand for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively. These expenses consisted primarily of administrative expenses associated with being a public listed company in France and in the United States since February 2021, accounting and audit fees, insurance and legal fees.

106

Table of Contents

Net financial expense was €(11,575) thousand and €(4,432) thousand for the years ended December 31, 2020 and 2021, respectively.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the change in fair value of convertible notes and derivative instruments was related to (i) the change in fair value of the ORNANE issued to Negma for €1,307 thousand, (ii) the change in fair value of the ORNANE issued to Atlas for (€3,017) thousand and (iii) the change in fair value of the derivative instruments for (€174) thousand.

During the year ended December 31, 2020, the change in fair value of convertible notes and derivative instruments was related to (i) the change in fair value of the ORNANE issued to Negma for (€5,304) thousand, (ii) the change in fair value of the ORNANE issued to Atlas for (€4,776) thousand.

NEGMA agreement

On August 21, 2019, we signed an agreement with NEGMA providing for up to €24 million in financing to us through the issuance of multiple tranches of convertible notes with attached warrants (ORNANEBSA), at our sole discretion.

Pursuant to this agreement, the board of directors approved the issuance of the following convertible notes and warrants during the year ended December 31, 2019:

On April 6, 2020, as part of the implementation of the ATLAS agreement described below, we terminated the contract with NEGMA.

Following this termination, NEGMA undertook legal action in order to claim damages of €910,900 from us as well as the delivery of 7,000,000 ordinary shares, that NEGMA considers it was entitled to pursuant to the only ORNANES still held by NEGMA, issued in consideration for a loan of €1,400,000 (140 bonds with par value of €10 thousand each).

The sum of €910,900 claimed by NEGMA corresponds to the contractual penalties alleged by NEGMA under the terms of our agreement with NEGMA, which provided for the payment of such penalties in the event of conversion of bonds into shares when the stock price is below the par value of the shares. We vigorously dispute this legal action and these requests for payment and delivery of shares.

107

Table of Contents

Pursuant to a summary judgment dated May 7, 2020, NEGMA obtained a decision partially responding to its claims ordering us, under penalty (which amounted to €7 thousand), to pay €378 thousand as a settlement according to the contractual terms of the Negma agreement on ORNANE for which Negma had sent a conversion notice before April 6, 2020 and deliver 2,050,000 ordinary shares to NEGMA.

The Company and NEGMA appealed the decision of the Paris Commercial Court.

On November 18, 2020, the Paris Court of Appeal cancelled the May decision and ordered NEGMA to return to us the 2,050,000 shares previously delivered to NEGMA as well as the provision of €378 thousand. In addition, NEGMA is required to pay €41 thousand to us as additional compensation recorded under the financial result of the period.

As of December 31, 2020, the Company recognized the right to receive the 2,050,000 shares to be returned by Negma in equity for €1,210 thousand in counterparts of the recognition of a financial liability. As of December 31, 2020, the financial liability due to Negma amounted to €7,357 thousand which represent 7,000,000 shares at fair value (€6,447 thousand) and the contractual penalties alleged by NEGMA (€910 thousand). As of December 31, 2021, the Company has fulfilled all of its obligations under the judgment of the Paris-Commercial Court rendered on March 16, 2021 and under the judgement rendered on July 16, 2021 by the judge of the Paris Court of Justice in charge of overseeing the execution of judgments as detailed below. The financial liability due to Negma as of December 31, 2021 is nil.

During the year 2020, 68 bonds held by NEGMA were converted into new shares generating the issuance of 3,400,000 shares under the formula mentioned above for tranche 1 and tranche 2.

NEGMA also exercised all BSA_T2 during the year ended December 31, 2020 generating the issuance of 694,444 shares. All BSA_T1 were still outstanding as of December 31, 2020. During the year ended December 31, 2021, NEGMA exercised all BSA_T1 generating the issuance of 585,936 shares at a share price of €0.64.

On March 16, 2021, the Paris Commercial Court rendered a judgement in NEGMA’s favor and ordered Biophytis to pay NEGMA a sum of €910 thousand in contractual penalties with late payment interest calculated at the LIBOR rate + 10%, to deliver to NEGMA 7,000,000 shares, subject to a penalty of €50 thousand per day of delay as from the tenth day after the notification of the judgment and for a period of 30 days and to pay NEGMA €100 thousand under article 700 of the French Code of Civil Procedure as well as the expenses and legal costs.

Biophytis filed a petition with the Paris Commercial Court on the ground of failure of the Judgment to rule on certain claims made by the Company in the proceedings and appealed the Judgment to the Paris Court of Appeal.

In addition, as regards to the execution of this Judgement, Biophytis has served NEGMA with a petition filed with the Presiding Judge of the Paris Court of Appeal requesting that immediate enforcement of the Judgment be stayed or, alternatively, that it be modified. Oral argument on this matter occurred on September 6, 2021 and the court is still deliberating.

In the meantime, on June 24, 2021, NEGMA served Biophytis with a petition filed with the judge of the Paris Court of Justice charged with overseeing the execution of judgments requesting (i) the payment of the fine for non-performance imposed by the Judgment in connection with its order to Biophytis to deliver 7,000,000 shares and (ii) that a final fine for non-performance be set.

Pursuant to a judgment rendered on July 16, 2021, the judge of the Paris Court of Justice in charge of overseeing the execution of judgments partially granted NEGMA’s claims (i) ordered Biophytis to pay the fine for non-performance imposed by the Judgment for €1,500 thousand, (ii) imposed a new provisional fine for non-performance of €50 thousand per day of delay in complying with the Judgment’s order against Biophytis, as of the tenth day from service of this judgment, for a period of 30 days, (iii) ordered Biophytis to pay NEGMA €8 thousand pursuant to Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure and (iv) ordered Biophytis to pay the costs of the proceedings.

Biophytis has fulfilled all of its obligations under the above two judgments.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company has paid (i) the contractual penalties (€910 thousand recorded in the financial liability due to NEGMA as of December 31, 2020), (ii) the fine for non-performance imposed by the Judgment €1,500 thousand, (iii) €108 thousand pursuant to Article 700 of the Code of Civil Procedure and (iv) late payment interest of €87 Thousand.

108

Table of Contents

As a result, the Company recorded financial indemnities of €1,695 thousand in the statement of operations during the year ended December 31, 2021.

With regard in particular to the delivery of 7,000,000 shares to NEGMA, Biophytis has (i) delivered in August 2021 to NEGMA the 2,050,000 shares created and delivered to NEGMA in June 2020 and returned by NEGMA to Biophytis under the judgment of the Paris Court of Appeal dated November 18, 2020, which Biophytis had kept in self-holding for a total amount of €1,521 thousand and (ii) issued 4,950,000 new shares to NEGMA in August 2021 as part of a capital increase reserved for it on the basis of the 13^th delegation of the general meeting of May 10, 2021 for a total amount of €3,619 thousand.

Biophytis has appealed against this judgment and, more generally, is taking all measures to safeguard its interests.

Following the delivery of the 2,050,000 shares and the issuance of the 4,950,000, the Company recorded in the statement of operations changes in fair value of the financial liability due to Negma of €1,307 thousand as of December 31, 2021.

Changes in fair value of the financial liability due to Negma amounted to (€5,304) thousand during the year ended December 31, 2020.

ATLAS contracts

In April 2020, we signed a new convertible bond financing of €24 million with ATLAS (the “2020 ATLAS Contract”) to continue the development of Sarconeos (BIO101). We issued a first tranche of €3 million on April 29, 2020, a second tranche of €3 million on June 19, 2020, and a third tranche of €3 million on August 28, 2020.

In 2020, 330 convertible notes (nominal value of €25 thousand each) were converted and the remaining 30 notes were redeemed in cash. As of December 31, 2020, there were no outstanding convertible notes issued to ATLAS.

On May 27, 2021, we issued a fourth and fifth tranche of €3 million each. On September 20, 2021, we issued a sixth and seventh tranche of €3 million each. On December 20, 2021, we issued an eighth of €3 million.

As of December 31, 2021, 376 convertible notes had been converted and there are 224 convertible notes outstanding. Pursuant to the 2020 ATLAS Contract, all ORNANEs have been issued to ATLAS.

In June 2021, we signed a new convertible bond financing of up to €32 million (8 tranches with a nominal value of €4 million each) with ATLAS (the “2021 ATLAS Contract”) to continue the development of Sarconeos (BIO 101) through the issuance of multiple convertible notes. As of December 31, 2021, no convertible notes have been issued as part of this contract. Since December 31, 2021, we drew down €4 million from our 2021 credit facility with ATLAS.

During the years ended December 31, 2021 and December 31, 2020, the Company recorded in the statement of operations changes in fair value of the convertible notes issued to Atlas for (€3,017) thousand and (€4,776) thousand, respectively.

Kreos agreements

In accordance with IFRS 9, the non-convertible debt component related to the 2018 Kreos venture loan agreement is measured according to the amortized cost method, which amounted to €0.9 million as of December 31, 2021 and to €4.4 million as of December 31, 2020.

On November 19, 2021, we signed a new venture loan agreement and bonds issue agreement which could provide for up to €10 million in financing to us through the issuance by us to Kreos of non-convertible bonds for €7.75 million (straight bonds) and convertible notes of €2.25 million, plus the issuance of attached warrants to the first tranche.

The loan agreement includes four tranches of respectively €2.5 million, €3.0 million, €2.5 million and €2.0 million. The two first tranches were drawn upon signing of the contract on November 19, 2021, the third tranche limited to €677 thousand was drawn on December 29, 2021.

In accordance with IFRS 9, the non-convertible bonds related to the 2021 Kreos venture loan agreement are initially recognized at fair value and subsequently measured at amortized cost, which amounted to €5.2 million as of December 31, 2021.

109

Table of Contents

Due to contractual clauses, the Company determined that the conversion option could not be settled in all circumstances by the exchange of a fixed amount of cash for a fixed number of the Company’s own equity instrument. As a result, in accordance with IFRS 9, the convertible notes were considered as an hybrid contract with a debt component and a derivative instrument related to the conversion option.

The conversion option was measured at fair value on the date of issuance (based on the Black-Scholes valuation model) with recognition of the changes in fair value in the statement of consolidated operations in accordance with IFRS 9. As of December 31, 2021, the derivative financial instruments related to the warrants amounted to €839 thousand.

The warrants have been considered as derivative instruments due to parity not fixed. A deferred day one loss has been recognized as a financial asset for the fair value of the warrants at issuance date and amortized over the maturity of the warrants (84 months). Subsequent changes in fair value of the warrants are recognized in the statement of consolidated operations in accordance with IFRS 9. As of December 31, 2021, the derivative financial instruments related to the warrants amounted to €639 thousand.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the Company recognized €555 thousand (€817 thousand in 2020) of interest expense and amortized costs related to Kreos loan agreements.

During the year ended December 31, 2021, the change in fair value of the derivative instruments related to the conversion option and the warrants amounted to (€174) thousand.

Comparison for the years ended December 31, 2019 and 2020