ITEM 1A. RISK FACTORS

Our business, financial condition, and operating results may be affected by a number of factors, whether currently known or unknown, including but not limited to those described below. Any one or more of such factors could directly or indirectly cause our actual results of operations and financial condition to vary materially from past or anticipated future results of operations and financial condition. Any of these factors, in whole or in part, could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations, and stock price. The following information should be read in conjunction with Part II, Item 7, “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and the consolidated financial statements and related notes in Part II, Item 8, “Financial Statements and Supplementary Data” of this Annual Report .

Risks Related to Our Financial Condition and Capital Requirements

We have incurred losses since our inception, have a limited operating history on which to assess our business, and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future.

We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. We have incurred net losses in each year since Private Miragen’s inception in 2006. During the years ended December 31, 2018 and 2017 , net loss was $32.7 million and $26.5 million , respectively. As of December 31, 2018 , we had an accumulated deficit of $126.3 million .

As of December 31, 2018 , we had cash and cash equivalents of $32.6 million and short-term investments of $29.9 million . In February 2017, we received $40.7 million in gross proceeds through a common stock private placement. In March 2017, we entered into a Common Stock Sales Agreement, or the ATM Agreement, with Cowen and Company, LLC, or Cowen, under which we may offer and sell, from time to time, at our sole discretion, shares of our common stock having an aggregate offering price of up to $50.0 million through Cowen as our sales agent. Through March 14, 2019 , we had sold, pursuant to the terms of the ATM Agreement, 1,260,975 shares of our common stock for aggregate net proceeds of approximately $10.3 million after deducting initial expenses for executing the “at the market offering” and commissions to Cowen as sales agent. In February 2018, we entered into an underwriting agreement, or the Underwriting Agreement, with Jefferies LLC, Evercore Group L.L.C., and Deutsche Bank Securities Inc., as representatives of several underwriters, or the Underwriters, relating to our public offering. Pursuant to the Underwriting Agreement, in February 2018 we sold 7,414,996 shares of our common stock, which resulted in net proceeds of approximately $37.9 million after deducting underwriting commissions and discounts and other offering expenses payable by us. In August 2018 , we entered into a Common Stock Purchase Agreement, or the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement, with LLS, for the sale of up to $5.0 million of shares of our common stock to LLS in a private placement, or the Offering. Under the terms of the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement, we expect to raise approximately $5.0 million in gross proceeds by selling shares of our common stock in five separate closings to LLS. The initial closing of the Offering was held on August 6, 2018 . At the initial closing, we issued 150,987 shares of our common stock, which resulted in net proceeds of approximately $0.9 million after deducting expenses incurred in connection with the Offering. We believe that we have sufficient capital to fund our operations in the normal course of business and to meet our liquidity needs

through the first quarter of 2020 .

We will continue to require substantial additional capital to continue our clinical development and potential commercialization activities. Accordingly, we will need to raise substantial additional capital to continue to fund our operations. The amount and timing of our future funding requirements will depend on many factors, including the pace and results of our clinical development efforts. Failure to raise capital as and when needed, on favorable terms or at all, would have a negative impact on our financial condition and our ability to develop our product candidates. Changing circumstances may cause us to consume capital significantly faster or slower than we currently anticipate. If we are unable to acquire additional capital or resources, we will be required to modify our operational plans to complete future milestones. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our available financial resources sooner than we currently anticipate. We may be forced to reduce our operating expenses and raise additional funds to meet our working capital needs, principally through the additional sales of our securities or debt financings or entering into strategic collaborations.

We have devoted substantially all of our financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our product candidates, including conducting clinical trials and providing general and administrative support for our operations. To date, we have financed our operations primarily through the sale of equity securities and convertible promissory notes. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the rate of our future expenditures and our ability to obtain funding through equity or debt financings, strategic collaborations, or grants. Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We expect our losses to increase as our product candidates enter more advanced clinical trials. It may be several years, if ever, before we complete pivotal clinical trials or have a product candidate approved for commercialization. We expect to invest significant funds into the research and development of our current product candidates to determine the potential to advance these product candidates to regulatory approval.

If we obtain regulatory approval to market a product candidate, our future revenue will depend upon the size of any markets in which our product candidates may receive approval, and our ability to achieve sufficient market acceptance, pricing, coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, and adequate market share for our product candidates in those markets. Even if we obtain adequate market share for our product candidates, because the potential markets in which our product candidates may ultimately receive regulatory approval could be very small, we may never become profitable despite obtaining such market share and acceptance of our products.

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

planned studies or trials, additional major studies or trials, or supportive trials necessary to support marketing approval.

Further, the net losses we incur may fluctuate significantly from quarter to quarter and year to year, such that a period-to-period comparison of our results of operations may not be a good indication of our future performance.

We have never generated any revenue from product sales and may never be profitable.

We have no products approved for commercialization and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Our ability to generate revenue and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with strategic collaborators, to successfully complete the development of, and obtain the regulatory and marketing approvals necessary to commercialize one or more of our product candidates. We do not anticipate generating revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future. Our ability to generate future revenue from product sales depends heavily on our success in many areas, including but not limited to:

Even if one or more of the product candidates that we develop is approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Portions of our current pipeline of product candidates have been in-licensed from third parties, which make the commercial sale of such in-licensed products potentially subject to additional royalty and milestone payments to such third parties. We will also have to develop or acquire manufacturing capabilities or continue to contract with contract manufacturers in order to continue development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. For instance, if the costs of manufacturing our drug product are not commercially feasible and we will need to develop or procure our drug product in a commercially feasible manner in order to successfully commercialize any future approved product, if any. Additionally, if we are not able to generate revenue from the sale of any approved products, we may never become profitable.

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

To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity, including pursuant to any sales under the ATM Agreement, the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement, convertible debt or other securities convertible into equity, the ownership interest of our stockholders will be diluted, and the terms of these new securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect rights of our stockholders. For instance, through March 14, 2019 , we had sold, pursuant to the terms of the ATM Agreement, 1,260,975 shares of our common stock for aggregate net proceeds of approximately $10.3 million , and, in August 2018 , we sold 150,987 shares of common stock to LLS under the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement for net proceeds of $0.9 million . We anticipate that we will continue to make sales of our common stock under the ATM Agreement and the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement from time to time into the foreseeable future, and we may sell shares of our common stock of up to $50.0 million and $5.0 million in aggregate value under the ATM Agreement and the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement, respectively. Sales under the ATM Agreement or the LLS Stock Purchase Agreement dilute the ownership interest of our

stockholders and may cause the price per share of our common stock to decrease. Debt financing, if available, would likely involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, making additional product acquisitions, or declaring dividends. For instance, our loan and security agreement with Silicon Valley Bank limits our ability to enter into an asset sale, enter into any change of control, incur additional indebtedness, pay any dividends, or enter into specified transactions with our affiliates. If we raise additional funds through strategic collaborations or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or future revenue streams or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. We cannot be assured that we will be able to obtain additional funding if and when necessary to fund our entire portfolio of product candidates to meet our projected plans. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis, we may be required to delay or discontinue one or more of our development programs or the commercialization of any product candidates or be unable to expand our operations or otherwise capitalize on potential business opportunities, which could materially harm our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

We have also historically received funds directly or indirectly from state and federal government grants for research and development. The grants have been, and any future government grants and contracts we may receive may be, subject to the risks and contingencies set forth below under the risk factor titled “ Reliance on government funding for our programs may add uncertainty to our research and commercialization efforts with respect to those programs that are tied to such funding and may impose requirements that limit our ability to take specified actions, increase the costs of commercialization and production of product candidates developed under those programs and subject us to potential financial penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations. ” Although we might apply for government contracts and grants in the future, we cannot be certain that we will be successful in obtaining additional grants for any product candidates or programs.

Risks Related to the Development of Our Product Candidates

Clinical trials are costly, time consuming, and inherently risky, and we may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities.

Clinical development is expensive, time consuming, and involves significant risk. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of development. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of clinical development include but are not limited to:

Any inability to successfully complete clinical development and obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional non-clinical studies and the results obtained from studying such new formulation may not be consistent with previous results obtained. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which our products have patent protection and may allow competitors to develop and bring products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.

The approach we are taking to discover and develop novel therapeutics that target microRNAs is unproven and may never lead to marketable products.

The scientific discoveries that form the basis for our efforts to discover and develop our product candidates are relatively recent. To date, neither we nor any other company has received regulatory approval to market therapeutics utilizing microRNA-targeted molecules. The scientific evidence to support the feasibility of developing drugs based on these discoveries is both preliminary and limited. Successful development of microRNA-targeted therapeutic products by us will require solving a number of issues, including providing suitable methods of stabilizing the therapeutic product and delivering it into target cells in the human body. In addition, any product candidates that we develop may not demonstrate in patients the chemical and pharmacological properties ascribed to them in laboratory and preclinical trials, and they may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen, ineffective, or even harmful ways. For instance, our clinical and preclinical data to date has not been fully validated and we have no way of knowing if, after validation, our clinical trial data will be complete and consistent. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize product candidates based upon this technological approach, we may not become profitable and the value of our capital stock may decline.

Further, our focus on microRNA technology for developing product candidates as opposed to multiple, more proven technologies for drug development, increases the risk associated with our business. If we are not successful in developing an approved product using microRNA technology, we may not be able to identify and successfully implement an alternative product development strategy. In addition, work by other companies pursuing similar technologies may encounter setbacks and difficulties that regulators and investors may attribute to our product candidates, whether appropriately or not.

Our microRNA-targeted therapeutic product candidates are based on a relatively novel technology, which makes it unusually difficult to predict the time and cost of development and the time and cost, or likelihood, of subsequently obtaining regulatory approval. To date, no microRNA-targeted therapeutics have been approved for marketing in the United States.

We have concentrated our research and development efforts to date on a limited number of product candidates based on our microRNA-targeted therapeutic platform and identifying our initial targeted disease indications. Our future success depends on our successful development of viable product candidates. Only three of our product candidates, cobomarsen, remlarsen, and MRG-110, are in clinical development, and the remainder of our product candidates are in preclinical development. There can be no assurance that we will not experience problems or delays in developing our product candidates and that such problems or delays will not cause unanticipated costs, or that any such development problems can be solved.

Additionally, the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, and other regulatory authorities, have relatively limited experience with microRNA-targeted therapeutics. No regulatory authority has granted approval to anyone, including us, to market or commercialize microRNA-targeted therapeutics, which may increase the complexity, uncertainty, and length of the regulatory review and approval process for our product candidates. If our product candidates fail to prove to be safe and effective, and commercially viable, our product candidate pipeline would have little, if any, value, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

The clinical trial, product approval, and manufacturing requirements of the FDA, the European Medicines Agency, and other regulatory authorities, and the criteria these regulators use to evaluate the safety and efficacy of a product candidate, vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty, and intended use of the product candidate. The regulatory review and approval process for novel product candidates such as microRNA-targeted therapeutics can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or more extensively studied product candidates. It is difficult to determine how long it will take or how much it will cost to obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates in either the United States or the EU or from other countries or regions of the world, or how long it will take to commercialize our product candidates, even if approved for marketing. Approvals by one regulatory agency may not be indicative of the likelihood of approval by other regulatory bodies. Delay or failure to obtain, or unexpected costs in obtaining, the regulatory approval necessary to bring a potential product candidate to market could decrease our ability to generate sufficient product revenue, and our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects may be harmed.

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

Undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates could cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay, or terminate clinical trials. They additionally may result in a delay of regulatory approval by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities, or, even in the instance that an affected product candidate is approved, may result in a restrictive drug label.

Our cobomarsen, remlarsen, and MRG-110 product candidates have been studied in only a limited number of patients with a confirmed diagnosis or healthy volunteers. The most common adverse events of any grade were injection site reactions, including pain, itchiness, redness, and swelling when compounds were delivered intradermally or subcutaneously. We may experience a higher rate or severity of adverse events and comparable or higher rates of discontinuation of trial participants in our future clinical trials. There is no guarantee that additional or more severe side effects will not be identified during ongoing or future clinical trials of our product candidates for current and other indications. Undesirable side effects and negative results for other indications may negatively impact the development and potential for approval of our product candidates for their proposed indications.

Additionally, even if one or more of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, potentially significant negative consequences could result, including but not limited to:

Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of a product candidate, even if approved, and could significantly harm our business, results of operations, and prospects.

Our product development program may not uncover all possible adverse events that patients who take our product candidates may experience. The number of subjects exposed to our product candidates and the average exposure time in the clinical development program may be inadequate to detect rare adverse events that may only be detected once the product is administered to more patients and for greater periods of time.

Clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. However, with a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure, we cannot be fully assured that rare and severe side effects of our product candidates will be uncovered. Such rare and severe side effects may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the drug. If such safety problems occur or are identified after our product candidates reach the market, the FDA may require that we amend the labeling of the product or recall the product or may even withdraw approval for the product.

Our microRNA-targeted therapeutic approach is novel. Negative public opinion and increased regulatory scrutiny of microRNA or other nucleic acid-based therapies may damage public perception of the safety of our product candidates and adversely affect our ability to conduct our business or obtain regulatory approvals for our product candidates.

MicroRNA therapy remains a novel technology, with no microRNA-targeted therapeutic product approved to date in the United States. Public perception may be influenced by claims that microRNA therapy is unsafe, and microRNA therapy may not gain the acceptance of the public or the medical community. In particular, our success will depend upon physicians who specialize in the treatment of the diseases targeted by our product candidates, prescribing therapies that involve the use of our product candidates in lieu of, or in addition to, existing therapies with which they are familiar and for which greater clinical data may be available. More restrictive government regulations or negative public opinion regarding microRNA or other nucleic acid-based therapeutics could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations and may delay or impair the development and commercialization of our product candidates or demand for any products we may develop. SAEs in microRNA clinical trials for our competitors’ products, even if not ultimately attributable to the relevant product candidates, and the resulting publicity, could result in increased government regulation, unfavorable public perception, potential regulatory delays in the testing or approval of our product candidates, stricter labeling requirements for those product candidates that are approved, and a decrease in demand for any such product candidates. For instance, in June 2016, the FDA placed a regulatory hold on the clinical trial of a microRNA- or nucleic acid-focused biopharmaceutical company with a microRNA-targeted product candidate for the treatment of hepatitis C virus due to SAEs in that trial. This company also voluntarily halted a Phase 1 clinical trial in patients with kidney disease due to unexpected toxicity issues in July 2018. Another microRNA-focused biopharmaceutical company also voluntarily halted an ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial for a microRNA-targeted therapy for multiple cancers in September 2016 due to multiple immune-related severe adverse events. We cannot predict what effect, if any, these clinical holds will have on the government and public perception of our product candidates.

We are heavily dependent on the success of our product candidates, which are in the early stages of clinical development. Some of our product candidates have produced results only in non-clinical settings, or for other indications than those for which we contemplate conducting development and seeking FDA approval, and we cannot give any assurance that we will generate data for any of our product candidates sufficiently supportive to receive regulatory approval in our planned indications, which will be required before they can be commercialized.

We have invested substantially all of our effort and financial resources to identify, acquire, and develop our portfolio of product candidates. Our future success is dependent on our ability to successfully further develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize one or more product candidates. We currently generate no revenue from sales of any products, and we may never be able to develop or commercialize a product candidate.

We currently have three product candidates in clinical trials. Of these product candidates, cobomarsen has been predominantly administered in patients with the mycosis fungoides form of CTCL, or MF. This is only one of the multiple indications for which we plan to develop this product candidate. Additionally, our clinical and preclinical data to date is not validated, and we have no way of knowing if after validation our clinical trial data will be complete and consistent. There can be no assurance that the data that we develop for our product candidates in our planned indications will be sufficiently supportive to obtain regulatory approval.

Based on discussions with the FDA, we believe the results from the SOLAR clinical trial could potentially allow us to apply for accelerated approval in the United States. We cannot guarantee that the outcome of this Phase 2 clinical trial will be sufficient to support, or if the FDA will grant us, accelerated approval of cobomarsen. If our data is not supportive of accelerated approval of cobomarsen, we cannot predict when, if ever, we will be able to seek approval of cobomarsen.

In addition, none of our other product candidates have advanced into a pivotal clinical trial for our proposed indications, and it may be years before any such clinical trial is initiated and completed, if at all. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. We cannot be certain that any of our product candidates will be successful in clinical trials or receive regulatory approval. Further, our product candidates may not receive regulatory approval even if they are successful in clinical trials. If we do not receive regulatory approvals for our product candidates, we may not be able to continue our operations.

Product development involves a lengthy and expensive process with an uncertain outcome, and results of earlier preclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of future clinical trial results.

Clinical testing is expensive and generally takes many years to complete, and the outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can

occur at any time during the clinical trial process. Additionally, microRNAs are a new class of drug target and as such may have some potentially unknown risks from both an efficacy and safety perspective. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of our product candidates may not be predictive of the results of larger, later-stage controlled clinical trials. Product candidates that have shown promising results in early-stage clinical trials may still suffer significant setbacks in subsequent clinical trials. Our clinical trials to date have been conducted on a small number of patients or healthy volunteers in limited numbers of clinical sites for a limited number of indications. We will have to conduct larger, well-controlled trials in our proposed indications to verify the results obtained to date and to support any regulatory submissions for further clinical development. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or adverse safety profiles despite promising results in earlier, smaller clinical trials. For instance, in June 2016, the FDA placed a regulatory hold on the clinical trial of a microRNA-focused biopharmaceutical company with a microRNA product candidate for the treatment of hepatitis C virus due to SAEs in that trial. This company also voluntarily halted a Phase 1 clinical trial in patients with kidney disease due to unexpected toxicity issues in July 2018. Another microRNA-focused biopharmaceutical company also voluntarily halted an ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial for a microRNA therapy for multiple cancers in September 2016 due to multiple immune-related severe adverse events. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses. We do not know whether any Phase 2, Phase 3, or other clinical trials we are conducting or may conduct will demonstrate consistent or adequate efficacy and safety with respect to the proposed indication for use sufficient to receive regulatory approval or market our drug candidates.

We may use our financial and human resources to pursue a particular research program or product candidate and fail to capitalize on programs or product candidates that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.

Because we have limited financial and human resources, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with some programs or product candidates or for other indications that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or more profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and future product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. We may also enter into additional strategic collaboration agreements to develop and commercialize some of our programs and potential product candidates in indications with potentially large commercial markets. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through strategic collaborations, licensing, or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate, or we may allocate internal resources to a product candidate in a therapeutic area in which it would have been more advantageous to enter into a partnering arrangement.

We may find it difficult to enroll patients in our clinical trials given the limited number of patients who have the diseases for which our product candidates are being studied. Difficulty in enrolling patients could delay or prevent clinical trials of our product candidates.

Identifying and qualifying patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates is essential to our success. The timing of our clinical trials depends in part on the rate at which we can recruit patients to participate in clinical trials of our product candidates, and we may experience delays in our clinical trials if we encounter difficulties in enrollment.

The eligibility criteria of our planned clinical trials may further limit the available eligible trial participants as we expect to require that patients have specific characteristics that we can measure or meet the criteria to assure their conditions are appropriate for inclusion in our clinical trials. For instance, we plan to enroll approximately 65 patients per treatment group in our SOLAR trial of cobomarsen in patients with MF, but have not yet dosed our first patient. The estimated prevalence of MF is 16,000 to 20,000 cases in the United States and only a subset of this group will satisfy the enrollment criteria for our SOLAR trial. As a result, we cannot guarantee that we will be able to enroll a sufficient number of patients to complete the SOLAR trial in a timely manner. We may not be able to identify, recruit, and enroll a sufficient number of patients to complete our clinical trials in a timely manner because of the perceived risks and benefits of the product candidate under study, the availability and efficacy of competing therapies and clinical trials, and the willingness of physicians to participate in our planned clinical trials. If patients are unwilling to participate in our clinical trials for any reason, the timeline for conducting trials and obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates may be delayed.

If we experience delays in the completion of, or termination of, any clinical trials of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates could be harmed, and our ability to generate product revenue from any of these product candidates could be delayed or prevented. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials would likely increase our overall costs, impair product candidate development, and jeopardize our ability to obtain regulatory approval relative to our current plans. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition, and prospects significantly.

We may face potential product liability, and, if successful claims are brought against us, we may incur substantial liability and costs. If the use or misuse of our approved products, if any, or product candidates harm patients, or is perceived to harm patients even when such harm is unrelated to our approved products, if any, or product candidates, our regulatory approvals, if any, could be revoked or otherwise negatively impacted, and we could be subject to costly and damaging product liability claims. If we are unable to obtain adequate insurance or are required to pay for liabilities resulting from a claim excluded from, or beyond the limits of, our insurance coverage, a material liability claim could adversely affect our financial condition.

The use or misuse of our product candidates in clinical trials and the sale of any products for which we may obtain marketing approval exposes us to the risk of potential product liability claims. There is a risk that our product candidates may induce adverse events. If we cannot successfully defend against product liability claims, we could incur substantial liability and costs. Some of our microRNA-targeted therapeutic candidates have shown adverse events in clinical trials, including injection site reactions and pain at the injection site, erythema, nausea, diarrhea, decreased white blood cell and platelet counts, neutropenia, elevated aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase, uric acid, and creatine kinase levels, prolonged partial thromboplastin time, blurred vision, itchiness, fatigue, headache, and microscopic hematuria, among others. In almost all cases, these events were mild to moderate and self-limited. There is a risk that our future product candidates may induce similar or more severe adverse events. Patients with the diseases targeted by our product candidates may already be in severe and advanced stages of disease and have both known and unknown significant preexisting and potentially life-threatening health risks. During the course of treatment, patients may suffer adverse events, including death, for reasons that may or may not be related to our product candidates. Such events could subject us to costly litigation, require us to pay substantial amounts of money to injured patients, delay, negatively impact, or end our opportunity to receive or maintain regulatory approval to market our products, or require us to suspend or abandon our commercialization efforts. Even in a circumstance in which an adverse event is unrelated to our product candidates, the investigation into the circumstance may be time-consuming or inconclusive. These investigations may delay our regulatory approval process or impact and limit the type of regulatory approvals our product candidates receive or maintain.

As a result of these factors, a product liability claim, even if successfully defended, could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Although we have product liability insurance, which covers our clinical trials in the United States, for up to $5.0 million per occurrence, up to an aggregate limit of $5.0 million, our insurance may be insufficient to reimburse us for any expenses or losses we may suffer. We will also likely be required to increase our product liability insurance coverage for the advanced clinical trials that we plan to initiate. If we obtain marketing approval for any of our product candidates, we will need to expand our insurance coverage to include the sale of commercial products. There is no way to know if we will be able to continue to obtain product liability coverage and obtain expanded coverage, if we require it, in sufficient amounts to protect us against losses due to liability, on acceptable terms, or at all. We may not have sufficient resources to pay for any liabilities resulting from a claim excluded from, or beyond the limits of, our insurance coverage. Where we have provided indemnities in favor of third parties under our agreements with them, there is also a risk that these third parties could incur liability and bring a claim under such indemnities. An individual may bring a product liability claim against us alleging that one of our product candidates causes, or is claimed to have caused, an injury or is found to be unsuitable for consumer use. Any such product liability claims may include allegations of defects in manufacturing, defects in design, failure to warn of dangers inherent in the product, negligence, strict liability, and a breach of warranties. Claims could also be asserted under state consumer protection acts. Any product liability claim brought against us, with or without merit, could result in:

Product liability claims may subject us to the foregoing and other risks, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

We may not be able to develop or identify a technology that can effectively deliver our product candidates to the intended diseased cells or tissues, and any failure in such delivery technology could adversely affect and delay the development of any or all of our other product candidates.

In connection with our clinical trials of cobomarsen, remlarsen, and MRG-110, we have used various routes of administration, including intravenous, intralesional, subcutaneous, and intradermal injections. While we have observed in our clinical trials that some or all of these routes of administration may be effective in delivering adequate levels of our product candidates to produce a therapeutic response, we cannot guarantee that this will be the case in any current or future clinical trials of our product candidates.  If we fail to develop effective routes of delivery to the target diseased cells or tissues, such failure could adversely affect and delay the development of our product candidates.

Risks Related to Regulatory Approval of Our Product Candidates and Other Legal Compliance Matters

A potential breakthrough therapy designation by the FDA for our product candidates may not lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process, and it does not increase the likelihood that our product candidates will receive marketing approval.

We may seek a breakthrough therapy designation from the FDA for some of our product candidates. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug or biological product that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and for which preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug or biological product may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. For drugs or biological products that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA could also be eligible for priority review.

Designation as a breakthrough therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe that one of our product candidates meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of a breakthrough therapy designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review, or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one of our product candidates is designated as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may later decide that the product candidate no longer meets the conditions for designation and the designation may be rescinded.

We may seek Fast Track designation for one or more of our product candidates, but we might not receive such designation, and even if we do, such designation may not actually lead to a faster development or regulatory review or approval process.

If a product candidate is intended for the treatment of a serious condition and nonclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical need for this condition, a product sponsor may apply for FDA Fast Track designation. If we seek Fast Track designation for a product candidate, we may not receive it from the FDA. However, even if we receive Fast Track designation, Fast Track designation does not ensure that we will receive marketing approval in any particular timeframe or at all. We may not experience a faster development or regulatory review or approval process with Fast Track designation compared to conventional FDA procedures. In addition, the FDA may withdraw Fast Track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program. Fast Track designation alone does not guarantee qualification for the FDA’s priority review procedures.

We may attempt to obtain accelerated approval of our product candidates. If we are unable to obtain accelerated approval, we may be required to conduct clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, or the size and duration of our pivotal clinical trials could be greater than currently planned, which could increase the expense of obtaining, reduce the likelihood of obtaining, and/or delay the timing of obtaining necessary marketing approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA, the FDA may require that we conduct confirmatory trials to verify clinical benefit. If our confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-approval requirements, the FDA may seek to withdraw accelerated approval.

We may seek accelerated approval for our product candidates, including cobomarsen. The FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic advantage over available therapies and demonstrates an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease. If granted, accelerated approval may be contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s predicted effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The FDA may require that any such confirmatory study be initiated or substantially underway prior to the submission of an application for accelerated approval. If such post-approval studies fail to confirm the drug’s clinical benefits relative to its risks, the FDA may withdraw its approval of the drug. If we choose to pursue accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that the FDA will agree that our proposed primary endpoint is an appropriate surrogate endpoint. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent FDA feedback that we will continue to pursue accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review, or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we submit an application for accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that such application will be accepted or that approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA also could require us to conduct further studies or trials prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type. We might not be able to fulfill the FDA’s requirements in a timely manner, which would cause delays, or approval might not be granted because our submission is deemed incomplete by the FDA. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval for a product candidate would result in a longer time period to commercialize such product candidate, could increase the cost of development of such product candidate, and could harm our competitive position in the marketplace.

Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA, we will be subject to rigorous post-approval requirements, including submission to the FDA of all promotional materials prior to their dissemination. The FDA may require us to conduct a confirmatory study to verify the predicted clinical benefit. The FDA could withdraw accelerated approval for multiple reasons, including our failure to conduct any required post-approval study with due diligence, or the inability of such study to confirm the predicted clinical benefit.

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

Even if we obtain regulatory approval for a product candidate, we will remain subject to ongoing regulatory requirements.

If any of our product candidates are approved, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements with respect to manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing clinical trials, and submission of safety, efficacy, and other post-approval 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 continuously comply with FDA and comparable foreign requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to current cGMPs, regulations and corresponding foreign regulatory manufacturing requirements. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMPs and adherence to commitments made in any new drug application or MAA.

Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the marketed product. We will be required to report adverse reactions and production problems, if any, to the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Any new legislation could result in delays in product development or commercialization, or increased costs to assure compliance. If our original marketing approval for a product candidate was granted accelerated approval by the FDA, we could be required to conduct a successful post-marketing clinical trial in order to confirm the

clinical benefit of our products. An unsuccessful post-marketing clinical trial or failure to complete such a trial could result in the withdrawal of marketing approval.

If a regulatory agency 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, the 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 would be expected to require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate adverse publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our products, and the value of the company and our operating results would be adversely affected.

Moreover, the FDA strictly regulates the promotional claims that may be made about drug products. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant civil, criminal, and administrative penalties.

In addition, if we were able to obtain accelerated approval of any of our drug candidates, the FDA may require us to conduct a confirmatory study to verify the predicted clinical benefit. Other regulatory authorities outside of the United States, may have similar requirements. The results from the confirmatory study may not support the clinical benefit, which could result in the approval being withdrawn. While operating under accelerated approval, we will be subject to certain restrictions that we would not be subject to upon receiving regular approval.

Healthcare legislative reform measures may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs. For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or collectively, or collectively the ACA, was passed, which was intended to substantially change the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers, and significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The ACA, among other things, addresses a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted, or injected, increases the minimum Medicaid rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, establishes annual fees and taxes on manufacturers of specified branded prescription drugs, and promotes a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program.

Since the ACA’s enactment, there have been, and continue to be, Congressional, executive branch, judicial, and regulatory challenges to the ACA, and both Congress and President Trump have delayed implementation or effectively repealed some of the ACA’s requirements through legislation, Executive Orders, failures to fund, and other actions. Additionally, on December 14, 2018, a Texas U.S. District Court Judge ruled that the ACA is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress as part of the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act of 2017, or the Tax Act. While the U.S. Texas District Court Judge, as well as the Trump Administration and CMS, have stated that the ruling will have no immediate effect

pending appeal of the decision, it is unclear how this decision, subsequent appeals, and other efforts to repeal and replace the ACA will impact the ACA and our business.

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted, and we expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand or lower pricing for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

We may be subject, directly or indirectly, to foreign, federal, and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, and health information privacy and security laws. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties, sanctions, or other liability.

Our operations may be subject to various foreign, federal, and state fraud and abuse laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal False Claims Act, and Physician Payments Sunshine Act, the GDPR, and other regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our relationships with healthcare professionals and our proposed sales, marketing, and education programs. In addition, we may be subject to patient privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include:

the federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures; state and local laws that require the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts.

Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. In addition, recent healthcare reform legislation has strengthened these laws. For example, the ACA, among other things, amends the intent requirement of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and criminal healthcare fraud statutes, such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate the law in order to have committed a violation. Moreover, the ACA provides that the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act.

If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to penalties, including civil, criminal, and administrative penalties, disgorgement, damages, fines, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, individual imprisonment, additional reporting requirements and/or oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations.

Reliance on government funding for our programs may add uncertainty to our research and commercialization efforts with respect to those programs that are tied to such funding and may impose requirements that limit our ability to take specified actions, increase the costs of commercialization and production of product candidates developed under those programs and subject us to potential financial penalties, which could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

During the course of our development of our product candidates, we have been funded in part through federal and state grants, including but not limited to the funding we received from Yale pursuant to a subcontract agreement with Yale. In addition to the funding we have received to date, we have applied and intend to continue to apply for federal and state grants to receive additional funding in the future. Contracts and grants funded by the U.S. government, state governments and their related agencies include provisions that reflect the government’s substantial rights and remedies, many of which are not typically found in commercial contracts, including powers of the government to:

In addition to those powers set forth above, the government funding we may receive could also impose requirements to make payments based upon sales of our products, if any, in the future.

We may not have the right to prohibit the U.S. government from using specified technologies developed by it, and we may not be able to prohibit third-party companies, including our competitors, from using those technologies in providing products and services to the U.S. government. The U.S. government generally takes the position that we have the right to royalty-free use of technologies that are developed under U.S. government contracts. These and other provisions of government grants may also apply to intellectual property we license now or in the future.

In addition, government contracts and grants normally contain additional requirements that may increase our costs of doing business, reduce our profits, and expose us to liability for failure to comply with these terms and conditions. These requirements include, for example:

If we fail to maintain compliance with any such requirements that may apply to us now or in the future, we may be subject to potential liability and to termination of our contracts.

If we fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

Our research and development activities and our third-party manufacturers’ and suppliers’ activities involve the controlled storage, use, and disposal of hazardous materials, including the components of our product candidates and other hazardous compounds. We and our manufacturers and suppliers are subject to laws and regulations governing the use, manufacture, storage, handling, and disposal of these hazardous materials. 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 cannot eliminate the risk of contamination, which could cause an interruption of our commercialization efforts, research and development efforts, and business operations, and cause 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 us and 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. 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 specified 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. We do not currently carry biological or hazardous waste insurance coverage.

Failure to comply with existing or future laws and regulations related to privacy or data security could lead to government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal fines or penalties), private litigation, other liabilities, and/or adverse publicity. Compliance or the failure to comply with such laws could increase the costs of our products and services, could limit their use or adoption, and could otherwise negatively affect our operating results and business.

 

Regulation of data processing is evolving, as federal, state, and foreign governments continue to adopt new, or modify existing, laws and regulations addressing data privacy and security, and the collection, processing, storage, transfer, and use of data. We and our partners may be subject to current, new, or modified federal, state, and foreign data protection laws and regulations (e.g., laws and regulations that address data privacy and data security, including, without limitation, health data). These new or proposed laws and regulations are subject to differing interpretations and may be inconsistent among jurisdictions, and guidance on implementation and compliance practices are often updated or otherwise revised, which adds to the complexity of processing personal data. These and other requirements could require us or our partners to incur additional costs to achieve compliance, limit our competitiveness, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, restrict our ability to use, store, transfer, and process data, impact our or our partners’ ability to process or use data in order to support the provision of our products or services, affect our or our partners’ ability to offer our products and services in certain locations, or cause regulators to reject, limit, or disrupt our clinical trial activities.

In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including state data breach notification laws, state health information privacy laws, and federal and state consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. In addition, we may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we may obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to criminal penalties, including if we knowingly obtain, use, or disclose individually identifiable health information maintained by a HIPAA-covered entity in a manner that is not authorized or permitted by HIPAA.

 

International data protection laws, including, without limitation, the EU ’s GDPR that took effect in May 2018, and member state data protection legislation, may also apply to health-related and other personal information obtained outside of the United States. These laws impose strict obligations on the ability to process health-related and other personal information of data subjects in the EU , including in relation to use, collection, analysis, and transfer of such personal information. These laws include several requirements relating to obtaining the consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, limitations on data processing, establishing a legal basis for processing, notification of data processing obligations or security incidents to appropriate data protection authorities or data subjects, the security and confidentiality of the personal data and various rights that data subjects may exercise.

The GDPR prohibits the transfer, without an appropriate legal basis, of personal data to countries outside of the European Economic Area, or EEA, such as the United States, which are not considered by the European Commission to provide an adequate level of data protection. Switzerland has adopted similar restrictions. Although there are legal mechanisms to allow for the transfer of personal data from the EEA and Switzerland to the United States, uncertainty about compliance with EU data protection laws remains and such mechanisms may not be available or applicable with respect to the personal data processing activities necessary to research, develop, and market our products and services. For example, ongoing legal challenges in Europe to the mechanisms allowing companies to transfer personal data from the EEA to the United States could result in further limitations on the ability to transfer personal data across borders, particularly if governments are unable or unwilling to reach new or maintain existing agreements that support cross-border data transfers, such as the EU -U.S. and Swiss-U.S. Privacy Shield framework. Additionally, other countries have passed or are considering passing laws requiring local data residency and/or restricting the international transfer of data.

Under the GDPR, regulators may impose substantial fines and penalties for non-compliance. Companies that violate the GDPR can face fines of up to the greater of 20 million Euros or 4% of their worldwide annual turnover (revenue). The GDPR has increased our responsibility and liability in relation to personal data that we process, requiring us to put in place additional mechanisms to ensure compliance with the GDPR and other EU and international data protection rules.

 

Failure to comply with U.S. and international data protection laws and regulations could result in government enforcement actions (which could include civil or criminal penalties, fines or sanctions), private litigation, and/or adverse publicity and could negatively affect our operating results and business. Moreover, patients about whom we or our partners obtain information, as well as the providers who share this information with us, may contractually limit our ability to use and disclose the information. Claims that we have violated individuals’ privacy rights, failed to comply with data protection laws, or breached our contractual obligations related to security or privacy, even if we are not found liable, could be expensive and time-consuming to defend and could result in adverse publicity that could harm our business. Compliance with data protection laws

may be time-consuming, require additional resources and could result in increased expenses, reduce overall demand for our products and services and make it more difficult to meet expectations of or commitments to customers or partners.

Any of these matters could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition, or operational results.

Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property

We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to microRNA targets, product compounds and processes for our development pipeline through acquisitions and in-licenses.

Presently, we have rights to the intellectual property, through licenses from third parties and under patents and patent applications that we own, to modulate only a subset of the known microRNA targets. Because our programs may involve a range of microRNA targets, including targets that require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these proprietary rights. In addition, our product candidates may require specific formulations to work effectively and efficiently and these rights may be held by others. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources, and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities.

For example, we have previously collaborated and may continue to collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such right of first negotiation for intellectual property, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to it. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program.

In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to third-party intellectual property rights, our business, financial condition, and prospects for growth could suffer.

We intend to rely on patent rights for our product candidates and any future product candidates. If we are unable to obtain or maintain exclusivity from the combination of these approaches, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets.

We rely or will rely upon a combination of patents, trade secret protection, and confidentiality agreements to protect the intellectual property related to our technologies and product candidates. Our success depends in large part on our and our licensors’ ability to obtain regulatory exclusivity and maintain patent and other intellectual property protection in the United States and in other countries with respect to our proprietary technologies and product candidates.

We have sought to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our technologies and product candidates that are important to our business. This process is expensive and time consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection.

The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain and involves complex legal and factual questions for which legal principles remain unsolved. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates in the United States or in other foreign countries. There is no assurance that all potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found, which can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue, and even if such patents cover our product candidates, third parties may challenge their validity, enforceability, or scope, which may result in such patents being narrowed, found unenforceable, or invalidated. Furthermore, even if they are unchallenged, our patents and patent applications may not adequately protect our intellectual property, provide exclusivity for our product candidates, or prevent others from designing around our claims. Any of these outcomes could impair our ability to prevent competition from third parties, which may have an adverse impact on our business.

We, independently or together with our licensors, have filed several patent applications covering various aspects of our product candidates. We cannot offer any assurances about which, if any, patents will issue, the breadth of any such patent, or whether any issued patents will be found invalid and unenforceable or will be threatened by third parties. Any successful opposition to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us after patent issuance could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced.

If we cannot obtain and maintain effective protection of exclusivity from our regulatory efforts and intellectual property rights, including patent protection or data exclusivity, for our product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively, and our business and results of operations would be harmed.

We may not have sufficient patent term protections for our product candidates to effectively protect our business.

Patents have a limited term. In the United States, the statutory expiration of a patent is generally 20 years after it is filed. Additional patent terms may be available through a patent term adjustment process, resulting from the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, delays during prosecution. Although various extensions may be available, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product candidate, we may be open to competition from generic medications.

Patent term extensions under the Hatch-Waxman Act in the United States and under supplementary protection certificates in Europe may be available to extend the patent or data exclusivity terms of our product candidates. We will likely rely on patent term extensions, and we cannot provide any assurances that any such patent term extensions will be obtained and, if so, for how long. As a result, we may not be able to maintain exclusivity for our product candidates for an extended period after regulatory approval, if any, which would negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. If we do not have sufficient patent terms or regulatory exclusivity to protect our product candidates, our business and results of operations will be adversely affected.

Changes in U.S. patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our products, and recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents.

As is the case with other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, our success is heavily dependent on patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biotechnology industry involve both technological and legal complexity, and is therefore costly, time-consuming, and inherently uncertain. In addition, the United States has recently enacted and is currently implementing wide-ranging patent reform legislation. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in specified circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in specified situations. In addition to increasing uncertainty with regard to our ability to obtain patents in the future, this combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the value of patents, once obtained. Depending on decisions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

The USPTO has issued subject matter eligibility guidance to patent examiners instructing USPTO examiners on the ramifications of the Supreme Court rulings in Mayo Collaborative Services v. Prometheus Laboratories, Inc. and Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., and applied the Myriad ruling to natural products and principles including all naturally occurring nucleic acids. In addition, the USPTO continues to provide updates to its guidance and this is a developing area. The USPTO guidance may make it impossible for us to pursue similar patent claims in patent applications we may prosecute in the future.

Our patent portfolio contains claims of various types and scope, including chemically modified mimics, inhibitors, as well as methods of medical treatment. The presence of varying claims in our patent portfolio significantly reduces, but may not eliminate, our exposure to potential validity challenges.

For our U.S. patent applications containing a claim not entitled to priority before March 16, 2013, there is a greater level of uncertainty in the patent law. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act, or the Leahy-Smith Act, was signed into law. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications will be prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. The USPTO has promulgated regulations and developed procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, and in particular, the first to file provisions, did not come into effect until

March 16, 2013. Accordingly, it is not yet clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations.

An important change introduced by the Leahy-Smith Act is that, as of March 16, 2013, the United States transitioned to a “first-to-file” system for deciding which party should be granted a patent when two or more patent applications are filed by different parties claiming the same invention. This will require us to be cognizant going forward of the time from invention to filing of a patent application. Furthermore, our ability to obtain and maintain valid and enforceable patents depends on whether the differences between our technology and the prior art allow our technology to be patentable over the prior art. Since patent applications in the United States and most other countries are confidential for a period of time after filing, we cannot be certain that we were the first to either: (i) file any patent application related to our product candidates or (ii) invent any of the inventions claimed in our patents or patent applications.

Among some of the other changes introduced by the Leahy-Smith Act are changes that limit where a patentee may file a patent infringement suit and new procedures providing opportunities for third parties to challenge any issued patent in the USPTO. Included in these new procedures is a process known as Inter Partes Review, or IPR, which has been generally used by many third parties over the past four years to invalidate patents. The IPR process is not limited to patents filed after the Leahy-Smith Act was enacted and would therefore be available to a third party seeking to invalidate any of our U.S. patents, even those filed before March 16, 2013. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in U.S. federal court necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Additionally, the rights of review and appeal for IPR decisions is an area of law that is still developing.

If we are unable to maintain effective proprietary rights for our product candidates or any future product candidates, we may not be able to compete effectively in our proposed markets.

In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary know-how that is not patentable or that we elect not to patent, processes for which patents are difficult to enforce and any other elements of our product candidate discovery and development processes that involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents. However, trade secrets can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our proprietary technology and processes, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, scientific advisors, and contractors. We also seek to preserve the integrity and confidentiality of our data and trade secrets by maintaining physical security of our premises and physical and electronic security of our information technology systems. While we have confidence in these individuals, organizations, and systems, agreements or security measures may be breached, and we may not have adequate remedies for any breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors.

Although we expect all of our employees and consultants to assign their inventions to us, and all of our employees, consultants, advisors, and any third parties who have access to our proprietary know-how, information, or technology to enter into confidentiality agreements, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, or that our trade secrets and other confidential proprietary information will not be disclosed, or that competitors will not otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Misappropriation or unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations. Additionally, if the steps taken to maintain our trade secrets are deemed inadequate, we may have insufficient recourse against third parties for misappropriating the trade secret.

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

Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to develop, manufacture, market, and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technology without infringing the patent rights of third parties. Numerous third-party U.S. and non-U.S. issued patents and pending applications exist in the area of microRNA. We are aware of U.S. and foreign patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties that cover therapeutic uses of microRNA replacements and inhibitors. From time to time, we may also monitor these patents and patent applications. We may in the future pursue available proceedings in the

U.S. and foreign patent offices to challenge the validity of these patents and patent applications. In addition, or alternatively, we may consider whether to seek to negotiate a license of rights to technology covered by one or more of such patents and patent applications. If any patents or patent applications cover our product candidates or technologies, we may not be free to manufacture or market our product candidates, including cobomarsen, remlarsen, or MRG-110, as planned, absent such a license, which may not be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all.

It is also possible that we have failed to identify relevant third-party patents or applications. For example, applications filed before November 29, 2000 remain confidential until patents issue and applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the United States can elect to remain confidential until patents issue. Moreover, it is difficult for industry participants, including us, to identify all third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our product candidates and technologies because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases, and the difficulty in assessing the meaning of patent claims. We may fail to identify relevant patents or patent applications or may identify pending patent applications of potential interest but incorrectly predict the likelihood that such patent applications may issue with claims of relevance to our technology. In addition, we may be unaware of one or more issued patents that would be infringed by the manufacture, sale, or use of a current or future product candidate, or we may incorrectly conclude that a third-party patent is invalid, unenforceable, or not infringed by our activities. Additionally, pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to specified limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our technologies, our product candidates, or the use of our product candidates.

There have been many lawsuits and other proceedings involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, including patent infringement lawsuits in federal courts, and interferences, oppositions, inter partes reviews, post-grant reviews, and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO and corresponding foreign patent offices. Numerous U.S. and foreign-issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent rights of third parties.

Parties making claims against us may obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties, redesign our infringing products, or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure.

We may not be successful in meeting our obligations under our existing license agreements necessary to maintain our product candidate licenses in effect. In addition, if required in order to commercialize our product candidates, we may be unsuccessful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses.

We currently have rights to the intellectual property, through licenses from third parties and under patents that we do not own, to develop and commercialize our product candidates. Because our programs may require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business will likely depend in part on our ability to maintain in effect these proprietary rights. Any termination of license agreements with third parties with respect to our product candidates would be expected to negatively impact our business prospects.

We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes, or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, cash resources, and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. Even if we are able to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that are necessary for our product candidates, there can be no assurance that they will be available on favorable terms.

We collaborate with U.S. and foreign academic institutions to identify product candidates, accelerate our research, and conduct development. Typically, these institutions have provided us with an option to negotiate an exclusive license to any of the institution’s rights in the patents or other intellectual property resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to

pursue a program of interest to us.

If we are unable to successfully obtain and maintain rights to required third-party intellectual property, we may have to abandon development of that product candidate or pay additional amounts to the third party, and our business and financial condition could suffer.

The patent protection and patent prosecution for some of our product candidates is dependent on third parties.

While we normally seek and gain the right to fully prosecute the patents relating to our product candidates, there may be times when patents relating to our product candidates are controlled by our licensors. For instance, this is the case with our agreement with RICC, who is primarily responsible for the prosecution of patents and patent applications licensed to us under the applicable agreement. If RICC or any of our future licensors fail to appropriately and broadly prosecute and maintain patent protection for patents covering any of our product candidates, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected, and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using, importing, and selling competing products. In addition, even where we now have the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensors in effect from actions prior to us assuming control over patent prosecution.

If we fail to comply with obligations in the agreements under which we license intellectual property and other rights from third parties or otherwise experience disruptions to our business relationships with our licensors, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.

We are a party to a number of intellectual property license and supply agreements that are important to our business and expect to enter into additional license agreements in the future. Our existing agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements will impose, various diligence, milestone payments, royalties, purchasing, and other obligations on us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under these agreements, or we are subject to a bankruptcy, our agreements may be subject to termination by the licensor, in which event we would not be able to develop, manufacture, or market products covered by the license or subject to supply commitments.

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

Competitors may infringe our patents or the patents of our licensors. If we or one of our licensing partners were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent covering our product candidate 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 could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, written description, clarity, or non-enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO, or made a misleading statement, during prosecution. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable.

Interference proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications or those of our licensors. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to us from the prevailing party. Our business could be harmed if the prevailing party does not offer us a license on commercially reasonable terms. Our defense of litigation or interference proceedings may fail and, even if successful, may result in substantial costs and distract our management and other employees. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties, or enter into development partnerships that would help us bring our product candidates to market.

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

We may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties or that our employees have wrongfully used or disclosed alleged trade

secrets of their former employers.

We employ individuals who were previously employed at universities or other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Although we have written agreements and make every effort to ensure that our employees, consultants, and independent contractors do not use the proprietary information or intellectual property rights of others in their work for us, we may in the future be subject to any claims that our employees, consultants, or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of 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, which could adversely impact our business. 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.

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

Filing, prosecuting, and defending patents on product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those 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. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop our own products and may also export infringing products to territories where we have patent 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.

Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries, particularly some developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets, and other intellectual property protection, particularly those relating to biotechnology products, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights generally.

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

Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties

We rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials, manufacture our product candidates, and perform other services. If these third parties do not successfully perform and comply with regulatory requirements, we may not be able to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval, or commercialize our product candidates and our business could be substantially harmed.

We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third-party CROs to conduct, monitor, and manage our ongoing clinical programs. We rely on these parties for execution of clinical trials, and we manage and control only some aspects of their activities. We remain responsible for ensuring that each of our trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory, and scientific standards, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs and other vendors are required to comply with all applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines, including those required by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in clinical development. If we or any of our CROs or vendors fail to comply with applicable laws, regulations, and guidelines, the results generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot be assured that our CROs and other vendors will meet these requirements, or that upon inspection by any regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that efforts, including any of our clinical trials, comply with applicable requirements. Our failure to comply with these laws, regulations, and guidelines may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would be costly and delay the regulatory approval process.

If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with

alternative CROs in a timely manner or do so on commercially reasonable terms. In addition, our CROs may not prioritize our clinical trials relative to those of other customers, and any turnover in personnel or delays in the allocation of CRO employees by the CRO may negatively affect our clinical trials. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, our clinical trials may be delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to meet our current plans with respect to our product candidates. CROs may also involve higher costs than anticipated, which could negatively affect our financial condition and operations.

In addition, we do not currently have, nor do we currently plan to establish, the capability to manufacture product candidates for use in the conduct of our clinical trials, and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale without the use of third-party manufacturers. We plan to rely on third-party manufacturers and their responsibilities will include purchasing from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials and regulatory approval. There are expected to be a limited number of suppliers for the active ingredients and other materials that we expect to use to manufacture our product candidates, and we may not be able to identify alternative suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of our product candidates for our clinical trials, and, if approved, ultimately for commercial sale. Although we generally do not expect to begin a clinical trial unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of a product candidate to complete the trial, any significant delay or discontinuity in the supply of a product candidate, or the active ingredient or other material components in the manufacture of the product candidate, could delay completion of our clinical trials and potential timing for regulatory approval of our product candidates, which would harm our business and results of operations.

We rely and expect to continue to rely on third parties to manufacture our clinical product supplies, and we intend to rely on third parties to produce and process our product candidates, if approved, and our commercialization of any of our product candidates could be stopped, delayed, or made less profitable if those third parties fail to obtain approval of government regulators, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of drug product, or fail to do so at acceptable quality levels or prices.

We do not currently have, nor do we currently plan to develop, the infrastructure or capability internally to manufacture our clinical supplies for use in the conduct of our clinical trials, and we lack the resources and the capability to manufacture any of our product candidates on a clinical or commercial scale. We currently rely on outside vendors to manufacture our clinical supplies of our product candidates and plan to continue relying on third parties to manufacture our product candidates on a commercial scale, if approved.

We do not yet have sufficient information to reliably estimate the cost of the commercial manufacturing of our product candidates and our current cost to manufacture our drug products may not be commercially feasible. Additionally, the actual cost to manufacture our product candidates could materially and adversely affect the commercial viability of our product candidates. As a result, we may never be able to develop a commercially viable product.

In addition, our reliance on third-party manufacturers exposes us to the following additional risks:

Each of these risks could delay our clinical trials, as well as the approval, if any, of our product candidates by the FDA, or the commercialization of our product candidates, or could result in higher costs, or could deprive us of potential product revenue. In addition, we rely on third parties to perform release testing on our product candidates prior to delivery to patients. If these tests are not appropriately conducted and test data are not reliable, patients could be put at risk of serious harm and could result in product liability suits.

The manufacture of medical products is complex and requires significant expertise and capital investment, including the development of advanced manufacturing techniques and process controls. Manufacturers of medical products often encounter difficulties in production, particularly in scaling up and validating initial production and absence of contamination. These problems include difficulties with production costs and yields, quality control, including stability of the product, quality assurance testing, operator error, shortages of qualified personnel, as well as compliance with strictly enforced federal, state, and foreign regulations. Furthermore, if contaminants are discovered in our supply of our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. We cannot be assured that any stability or other issues relating to the manufacture of our product candidates will not occur in the future. Additionally, our manufacturers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If our manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, or otherwise fail to comply with their contractual obligations, our ability to provide our product candidates to patients in clinical trials would be jeopardized. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely.

We may be unable to realize the potential benefits of any collaboration.

Even if we are successful in entering into a collaboration with respect to the development and/or commercialization of one or more product candidates, there is no guarantee that the collaboration will be successful. Collaborations may pose a number of risks, including:

As a result, a collaboration may not result in the successful development or commercialization of our product candidates.

For instance, in October 2011, we entered into the Servier Collaboration Agreement with Servier for the research,

development, and commercialization of RNA-targeting therapeutics in cardiovascular disease, which was subsequently amended. Under the Servier Collaboration Agreement, we have granted Servier an exclusive license to research, develop, and commercialize RNA-targeting therapeutics for one named target in the cardiovascular field and the right to obtain such an exclusive license for one additional target through September 2019. Servier’s rights to a given target are limited to therapeutics in the cardiovascular field in their territory, which is worldwide except for the United States and Japan. We retain all rights for the named target in the United States and Japan in the cardiovascular field and worldwide for any products or product candidates outside of the cardiovascular field. We cannot guarantee that any product candidate will ever be successfully commercialized under the Servier Collaboration Agreement. If no product candidate subject to the Servier Collaboration Agreement is successfully commercialized, we may never receive additional milestone or any royalty payments under the Servier Collaboration Agreement. Also, due to restrictions contained in the Servier Collaboration Agreement, we may not be able to effectively develop, market, or commercialize any such product candidate in the United States and Japan.

We enter into various contracts in the normal course of our business in which we indemnify the other party to the contract. In the event we have to perform under these indemnification provisions, we could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.

In the normal course of business, we periodically enter into academic, commercial, service, collaboration, licensing, consulting, and other agreements that contain indemnification provisions. With respect to our academic and other research agreements, we typically indemnify the institution and related parties from losses arising from claims relating to the products, processes, or services made, used, sold, or performed pursuant to the agreements for which we have secured licenses, and from claims arising from our or our sublicensees’ exercise of rights under the agreement. With respect to our collaboration agreements, we indemnify our collaborators from any third-party product liability claims that could result from the production, use, or consumption of the product, as well as for alleged infringements of any patent or other intellectual property right by a third party. With respect to consultants, we indemnify them from claims arising from the good faith performance of their services.

Should our obligation under an indemnification provision exceed applicable insurance coverage or if we were denied insurance coverage, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected. Similarly, if we are relying on a collaborator to indemnify us and the collaborator is denied insurance coverage or the indemnification obligation exceeds the applicable insurance coverage, and if the collaborator does not have other assets available to indemnify us, our business, financial condition, and results of operations could be adversely affected.

Risks Related to Commercialization of Our Product Candidates

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

Although some of our employees may have been employed at companies that have launched pharmaceutical products in the past, we have no experience selling and marketing our product candidates and we currently have no marketing or sales organization. To successfully commercialize any products that may result from our development programs, we will need to find one or more collaborators to commercialize our products or invest in and develop these capabilities, either on our own or with others, which would be expensive, difficult, and time consuming. Any failure or delay in entering into agreements with third parties to market or sell our product candidates or in the timely development of our internal commercialization capabilities could adversely impact the potential for the launch and success of our products.

If commercialization collaborators do not commit sufficient resources to commercialize our future products and we are unable to develop the necessary marketing and sales capabilities on our own, we will be unable to generate sufficient product revenue to sustain or grow our business. We may be competing with companies that currently have extensive and well-funded marketing and sales operations, particularly in the markets our product candidates are intended to address. Without appropriate capabilities, whether directly or through third-party collaborators, we may be unable to compete successfully against these more established companies.

We may attempt to form collaborations in the future with respect to our product candidates, but we may not be able to do so, which may cause us to alter our development and commercialization plans.

We may attempt to form strategic collaborations, create joint ventures, or enter into licensing arrangements with third parties with respect to our programs that we believe will complement or augment our existing business. We may face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic collaborators, and the negotiation process to secure appropriate terms is time

consuming and complex. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish such a strategic collaboration for any product candidates and programs on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. This may be because our product candidates and programs may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort, our research and development pipeline may be viewed as insufficient, the competitive or intellectual property landscape may be viewed as too intense or risky, and/or third parties may not view our product candidates and programs as having sufficient potential for commercialization, including the likelihood of an adequate safety and efficacy profile.

Any delays in identifying suitable collaborators and entering into agreements to develop and/or commercialize our product candidates could delay the development or commercialization of our product candidates, which may reduce their competitiveness even if they reach the market. Absent a strategic collaborator, we would need to undertake development and/or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to fund and undertake development and/or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional expertise and additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may not be able to develop our product candidates or bring them to market and our business may be materially and adversely affected.

If the market opportunities for our product candidates are smaller than we believe they are, we may not meet our revenue expectations and, assuming approval of a product candidate, our business may suffer. Because the patient populations in the market for our product candidates may be small, we must be able to successfully identify patients and acquire a significant market share to achieve profitability and growth.

Given the small number of patients who have the diseases that we are targeting, our eligible patient population and pricing estimates may differ significantly from the actual market addressable by our product candidates. For instance, the lead indication of cobomarsen is MF. The estimated prevalence of MF is 16,000 to 20,000 cases in the United States, only a subset of which may benefit from treatment with cobomarsen. Our projections of both the number of people who have this disease, as well as the subset of people with this disease who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including the scientific literature, patient foundations, or market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients may turn out to be lower than expected. Additionally, while we believe that the data in our Phase 1 clinical trials for cobomarsen and remlarsen are supportive of application to other indications, there can be no assurance that our clinical trials in those indications will support efficacy of our product candidates in such expanded indications. Likewise, the potentially addressable patient population for each of our product candidates may be limited or may not be amenable to treatment with our product candidates, and new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, which would adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

We face substantial competition and our competitors may discover, develop, or commercialize products faster or more successfully than us.

The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We face competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies, universities, and other research institutions worldwide with respect to cobomarsen, remlarsen, MRG-110, and the other product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future. We are aware that the following companies have therapeutics marketed or in development for CTCL: Argenx, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Celgene Corporation, Helsinn Group, innate Pharma, Kyowa Hakko Kirin, Merck & Co., Inc., Mylan Pharmaceuticals Inc., Novartis International AG, Spectrum Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Seattle Genetics, Inc., Takeda Pharmaceutical Company Ltd, and Valeant Pharmaceuticals International, Inc. We are also aware that the several companies have marketed therapeutics for pulmonary fibrosis, including Boehringer Ingelheim GmbH and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring, or licensing technologies and drug products that are more effective or less costly than cobomarsen, remlarsen, MRG-110, or any other product candidates that we are currently developing or that we may develop, which could render our product candidates obsolete and noncompetitive.

In addition to the competition we face from alternative therapies for the diseases we intend to target with our product candidates, we are also aware of several companies that are also working specifically to develop microRNA-targeted therapeutics, including Regulus Therapeutics, Inc., and InteRNA Technologies, B.V. Further, there are several companies working to develop other types of oligonucleotide therapeutic products, including Ionis Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Alnylam Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Arrowhead Pharmaceuticals, Inc., Dicerna Pharmaceuticals, Inc., STELLAS Life Sciences Group, Inc., Silence Therapeutics AG, and Translate Bio, Inc. Many of our competitors have substantially greater financial, technical, and other resources, such as larger research and development staff and experienced marketing and manufacturing organizations. Third-party payors, including governmental and private insurers, may also encourage the use of generic products. For example, if cobomarsen, remlarsen, or MRG-110 is approved, it may be priced at a significant premium over

other competitive products. This may make it difficult for cobomarsen, remlarsen, MRG-110, or any other future products to compete with these products.

If our competitors obtain marketing approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for their product candidates more rapidly than us, it could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.

Many of our competitors have materially greater name recognition and financial, manufacturing, marketing, research, and drug development resources than we do. Additional mergers and acquisitions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated in our competitors. Large pharmaceutical companies in particular have extensive expertise in preclinical and clinical testing and in obtaining regulatory approvals for drugs. In addition, academic institutions, government agencies, and other public and private organizations conducting research may seek patent protection with respect to potentially competitive products or technologies. These organizations may also establish exclusive collaborative or licensing relationships with our competitors. Failure of cobomarsen, remlarsen, MRG-110, or other product candidates to effectively compete against established treatment options or in the future with new products currently in development would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.

The commercial success of any of our current or future product candidates will depend upon the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and others in the medical community.

Even with the approvals from the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities, the commercial success of our products will depend in part on the healthcare providers, patients, and third-party payors accepting our product candidates as medically useful, cost-effective, and safe. Any product that we bring to the market may not gain market acceptance by physicians, patients, and third-party payors. The degree of market acceptance of any of our products will depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to:

Even if a product displays a favorable efficacy and safety profile upon approval, market acceptance of the product remains uncertain. Efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors on the benefits of the products may require significant investment and resources and may never be successful. If our products fail to achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors, and other healthcare providers, we will not be able to generate sufficient revenue to become or remain profitable.

We may not be successful in any efforts to identify, license, discover, develop, or commercialize additional product candidates.

Although a substantial amount of our effort will focus on the continued clinical testing, potential approval, and commercialization of our existing product candidates, the success of our business is also expected to depend in part upon our

ability to identify, license, discover, develop, or commercialize additional product candidates. Research programs to identify new product candidates require substantial technical, financial, and human resources. We may focus our efforts and resources on potential programs or product candidates that ultimately prove to be unsuccessful. Our research programs or licensing efforts may fail to yield additional product candidates for clinical development and commercialization for a number of reasons, including but not limited to the following:

If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, or we may not be able to identify, license, discover, develop, or commercialize additional product candidates, which would have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, or results of operations and could potentially cause us to cease operations.

Failure to obtain or maintain adequate reimbursement or insurance coverage for our products, if any, could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.

The pricing, as well as the coverage, and reimbursement of our approved products, if any, must be sufficient to support our commercial efforts and other development programs, and the availability of coverage and adequacy of reimbursement by third-party payors, including government healthcare programs, health maintenance organizations, private insurers, and other healthcare management organizations, are essential for most patients to be able to afford expensive treatments. Sales of our approved products, if any, will depend substantially, both domestically and abroad, on the extent to which the costs of our approved products, if any, will be paid for or reimbursed by third-party payors. If coverage and reimbursement are not available, or are available only in limited amounts, we may have to subsidize or provide products for free, or we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products.

In addition, there is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement for newly-approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about coverage and reimbursement for new drugs are typically made by CMS, which is an agency within the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services that decides whether and to what extent a new drug will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private third-party payors tend to follow the coverage and reimbursement policies established by CMS to a substantial degree, but also have their own methods and approval process apart from Medicare determinations. It is difficult to predict what CMS will decide with respect to reimbursement for novel product candidates such as our and what reimbursement codes our product candidates may receive if approved.

Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other price-restrictive regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe, Canada, and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of products. In many countries, the prices of products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our products, if any. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the potential revenue may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.

Moreover, increasing efforts by third-party payors in the United States and abroad to limit or reduce healthcare costs may result in restrictions on coverage and the level of reimbursement for new products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products. Further, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. For example, the Trump administration released a “Blueprint” to lower drug prices and reduce out of pocket costs of drugs that contains additional proposals to increase manufacturer competition, increase the negotiating power of certain federal healthcare programs, incentivize manufacturers to lower the list price of their products, and reduce the out of pocket costs of drug products paid by consumers.

We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with products due to the increasing trend toward managed healthcare, including the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has increased and is expected to continue to increase in the future. As a result, profitability of our products, if any, may be more difficult to achieve even if they receive regulatory approval.

Risks Related to Our Business Operations

Our future success depends in part on our ability to retain our president and chief executive officer and to attract, retain, and motivate other qualified personnel.

We are highly dependent on William S. Marshall, Ph.D., our president and chief executive officer, the loss of whose services may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. Dr. Marshall could leave our employment at any time, as he is an “at will” employee. Recruiting and retaining other qualified employees, consultants, and advisors for our business, including scientific and technical personnel, will also be critical to our success. There is currently a shortage of highly qualified personnel in our industry, which is likely to continue. Additionally, this shortage of highly qualified personnel is particularly acute in the area where we are located. As a result, competition for personnel is intense and the turnover rate can be high. We may not be able to attract and retain personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for individuals with similar skill sets. In addition, failure to succeed in development and commercialization of our product candidates may make it more challenging to recruit and retain qualified personnel. The inability to recruit and retain qualified personnel, or the loss of the services of Dr. Marshall, may impede the progress of our research, development, and commercialization objectives and would negatively impact our ability to succeed in our product development strategy.

We will need to expand our organization and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth, which could disrupt our operations.

As of December 31, 2018 , we had 77 full-time employees. As our development and commercialization plans and strategies develop, we expect to need additional managerial, operational, sales, marketing, financial, legal, and other resources. Our management may need to divert a disproportionate amount of our attention away from our day-to-day activities and devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities. We may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations, which may result in weaknesses in our infrastructure, operational mistakes, loss of business opportunities, loss of employees, and reduced productivity among remaining employees. Our expected growth could require significant capital expenditures and may divert financial resources from other projects, such as the development of additional product candidates. If our management is unable to effectively manage our growth, our expenses may increase more than expected, our ability to generate and/or grow revenue could be reduced and we may not be able to implement our business strategy. Our future financial performance and our ability to commercialize product candidates and compete effectively will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth.

Failure in our information technology and storage systems could significantly disrupt the operation of our business.

Our ability to execute our business plan and maintain operations depends on the continued and uninterrupted performance of our information technology, or IT, systems. IT systems are vulnerable to risks and damages from a variety of sources, including telecommunications or network failures, malicious human acts, and natural disasters. Moreover, despite network security and back-up measures, some of our and our vendors’ servers are potentially vulnerable to physical or electronic break-ins, including cyber-attacks, computer viruses, and similar disruptive problems. These events could lead to the unauthorized access, disclosure, and use of non-public information. The techniques used by criminal elements to attack

computer systems are sophisticated, change frequently, and may originate from less regulated and remote areas of the world. As a result, we may not be able to address these techniques proactively or implement adequate preventative measures. If our computer systems are compromised, we could be subject to fines, damages, litigation, and enforcement actions, and we could lose trade secrets, the occurrence of which could harm our business. Despite precautionary measures to prevent unanticipated problems that could affect our IT systems, sustained or repeated system failures that interrupt our ability to generate and maintain data could adversely affect our ability to operate our business.

Our ability to use net operating losses to offset future taxable income may be subject to limitation.

Our net operating loss, or NOL, carryforwards could expire unused and be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. because of their limited duration or because of restrictions under U.S. tax law. Our NOLs generated in tax years beginning on or prior to December 31, 2017 are only permitted to be carried forward for 20 years under applicable U.S. tax law. Under H.R. 1, “An Act to provide for reconciliation pursuant to titles II and V of the concurrent resolution on the budget for fiscal year 2018”, informally titled the Tax Act, our federal NOLs generated in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal NOLs is limited. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Act.

 

In addition, under Section 382 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which is generally defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. Our most recent analysis of possible ownership changes was completed for certain tax periods ending through the date of the Merger. The Merger resulted in an ownership change for us and, accordingly, our NOL carryforwards and certain other tax attributes are subject to limitation. It is possible that we have undergone additional ownership changes before and after the Merger, and additional ownership changes in the future could result in additional limitations on our NOL carryforwards.

Consequently, even if we achieve profitability, we may not be able to utilize a material portion of our NOL carryforwards and certain other tax attributes, which could have a material adverse effect on cash flow and results of operations.

New or future changes to tax laws could materially adversely affect our company.

The Tax Act significantly revises the Code. The Tax Act, among other things, reduces the corporate tax rate from a top marginal rate of 35% to a flat rate of 21%, limits the tax deduction for interest expense to 30% of adjusted taxable income (except for certain small businesses), limits the deduction for NOLs carried forward from taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 to 80% of current year taxable income, eliminates NOL carrybacks, imposes a one-time tax on offshore earnings at reduced rates regardless of whether they are repatriated, eliminates U.S. tax on foreign earnings (subject to certain important exceptions), allows immediate deductions for certain new investments instead of deductions for depreciation expense over time, and modifies or repeals many business deductions and credits. Notwithstanding the reduction in the corporate income tax rate, the overall impact of the Tax Act is uncertain and our business and financial condition could be adversely affected. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the Tax Act. The impact of the Tax Act or any future tax laws on holders of our common stock is also uncertain and could be adverse. We urge our stockholders to consult with their legal and tax advisors with respect to this legislation and the potential tax consequences of investing in or holding our common stock.

Our effective tax rate may fluctuate, and we may incur obligations in tax jurisdictions in excess of accrued amounts.

We are subject to taxation in numerous U.S. states and territories and non-U.S. jurisdictions. As a result, our effective tax rate is derived from a combination of applicable tax rates in the various places that we operate. In preparing our financial statements, we estimate the amount of tax that will become payable in each of such places. Nevertheless, our effective tax rate may be different than experienced in the past due to numerous factors including passage of the newly enacted federal income tax law, the results of examinations and audits of our tax filings, our inability to secure or sustain acceptable agreements with tax authorities, changes in accounting for income taxes, and changes in tax laws. Any of these factors could cause us to experience an effective tax rate significantly different from previous periods or our current expectations and may result in tax obligations in excess of amounts accrued in our financial statements.

Risks Related to Ownership of our Common Stock

The market price of our common stock is expected to be volatile, and the market price of our common stock may drop in the future.

The market price of our common stock following the Merger has been, and may continue to be, subject to significant fluctuations. Market prices for securities of early-stage pharmaceutical, biotechnology, and other life sciences companies have historically been particularly volatile. Some of the factors that may cause the market price of our common stock to fluctuate include:

Moreover, the capital markets in general have experienced substantial volatility that has often been unrelated to the operating performance of individual companies. These broad market fluctuations may also adversely affect the trading price of our common stock.

In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities, stockholders have often instituted class action securities litigation against those companies. Such litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and diversion of management attention and resources, which could significantly harm our profitability and reputation.

Additionally, a decrease in our stock price may cause our common stock to no longer satisfy the continued listing standards of The Nasdaq Capital Market. If we are not able to maintain the requirements for listing on The Nasdaq Capital Market, we could be delisted, which could have a materially adverse effect on our ability to raise additional funds as well as the price and liquidity of our common stock.

We incur costs and demands upon management as a result of complying with the laws and regulations affecting public companies.

As a result of the Merger, we incur significant legal, accounting, and other expenses that Private Miragen did not incur as a private company, including costs associated with public company reporting requirements. We also incur costs associated with corporate governance requirements, including requirements under the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as new rules implemented by the SEC and The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC, or Nasdaq. These rules and regulations are expected to increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costly. For example, our management team consists of the executive officers of Private Miragen prior to the Merger, some of whom have not previously managed and operated a public company. These executive officers and other personnel will need to devote substantial time to gaining expertise regarding operations as a public company and compliance with applicable laws and regulations. These rules and regulations may also make it difficult and expensive for us to obtain directors’ and officers’ liability insurance. As a result, it may be more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified individuals to serve on our board of directors or as our executive officers, which may adversely affect investor confidence and could cause our business or stock price to suffer.

Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of us more difficult and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our management.

Provisions in our certificate of incorporation and bylaws may delay or prevent an acquisition or a change in management. These provisions include a prohibition on actions by written consent of our stockholders and the ability of our board of directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval. In addition, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporate Law, which prohibits stockholders owning in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us. Although we believe these provisions collectively will provide for an opportunity to receive higher bids by requiring potential acquirers to negotiate with our board of directors, they would apply even if the offer may be considered beneficial by some stockholders. In addition, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove then current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of the board of directors, which is responsible for appointing the members of management.

Our bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for substantially all disputes between us and our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees.

Our bylaws provide that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the sole and exclusive forum for any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty owed by any of our directors, officers, or other employees to us or our stockholders, any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to any provisions of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws, or any action asserting a claim against us that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. The choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or other employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against our and our directors, officers, and other employees. If a court were to find the choice of forum provision contained in the bylaws to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur

additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions.

We do not anticipate that we will pay any cash dividends in the foreseeable future.

The current expectation is that we will retain our future earnings, if any, to fund the development and growth of our business. As a result, capital appreciation, if any, of our common stock will be your sole source of gain, if any, for the foreseeable future.

Historically, there has not been an active trading market for our common stock, and we cannot guarantee an active market for our common stock will be sustained in the future. As a result, our stockholders may not be able to resell their shares of common stock for a profit, if at all.

Prior to the Merger, there had been no public market for Private Miragen’s common stock. An active trading market for our shares of common stock has yet to develop, and even if an active market for our common stock were to develop, it may not be sustained. If an active market for our common stock is not sustained, it may be difficult for our stockholders to sell their shares at an attractive price or at all.

Future sales of shares by existing stockholders could cause our stock price to decline.

If our stockholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market after legal restrictions on resale lapse, the trading price of our common stock could decline. In addition, shares of common stock that are subject to our outstanding options will become eligible for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of various vesting agreements and Rules 144 and 701 under the Securities Act of 1933, as amended.

Our principal stockholders own a significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.

Our directors, officers, 5% stockholders, and their affiliates currently beneficially own a substantial portion of our outstanding voting stock. Therefore, these stockholders have the ability and may continue to have the ability to influence us through this ownership position. These stockholders may be able to determine some or all matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, these stockholders, acting together, may be able to control elections of directors, amendments of organizational documents, or approval of any merger, sale of assets, or other major corporate transaction. This may prevent or discourage unsolicited acquisition proposals or offers for our common stock that you may believe are in your best interest as one of our stockholders.

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

The trading market for our common stock is influenced by the research and reports that equity research analysts publish about us and our business. Equity research analysts may elect not to provide research coverage of our common stock and such lack of research coverage may adversely affect the market price of our common stock. In the event we do have equity research analyst coverage, we will not have any control over the analysts or the content and opinions included in their reports. The price of our common stock could decline if one or more equity research analysts downgrade our stock or issue other unfavorable commentary or research. If one or more equity research analysts ceases coverage of us or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our common stock could decrease, which in turn could cause our stock price or trading volume to decline.

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

We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, and the rules and regulations of Nasdaq. The Sarbanes-Oxley Act requires, among other things, that we maintain effective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting. We must perform system and process evaluation and testing of our internal control over financial reporting to allow management to report on the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting in our annual report filing for that year, as required by Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. As a private company, Private Miragen had never been required to test its internal controls within a specified period. This requires that we incur substantial professional fees and internal costs to expand our accounting and finance functions and that we expend significant management efforts. We may experience difficulty in meeting these reporting requirements in a timely manner for each period.

We may discover weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected.

If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, the market price of our common stock could decline, and it could be subject to sanctions or investigations by Nasdaq, the SEC, or other regulatory authorities.