Insiders ranked by realized 90-day signed return on their open-market trades at Bicara Therapeutics Inc.. Minimum 3 scored trades. Returns are signed - a sale followed by a rally counts against the insider.
Year-over-year tone shift - average net-tone change across Risk Factors and MD&A vs the prior 10-K. This filing is -0.00pp more bearish than last year's.
Why YoY instead of absolute: the LM lexicon has ~6.6× more negative words than positive (legal/risk-disclosure language is heavy on hedging), so every 10-K reads bearish on raw tone. Year-over-year change strips that bias and surfaces the actual shift in management's framing.
Tone shift by section
The two components the gauge averages: how Risk Factors and MD&A each shifted in net tone versus last year's 10-K. The headline above is their average, so a green needle over a soft section just means the other section carried it.
Risk Factors
-0.00pp
Flat
Net-tone change vs last year's 10-K.
MD&A
-
Not scored
Net-tone change vs last year's 10-K.
Per-snippet highlights
Sentence-level sentiment highlighting with category and subcategory filters is coming once the snippet-scoring pipeline lands. For now, dig into the actual section text on the Sections tab.
Language change vs prior 10-K
Risk Factors (Item 1A) - words with the biggest YoY frequency increase
Negative rising
adverse+4
negative+2
breach+2
limitations+2
challenges+2
Positive rising
able+1
successful+1
gain+1
breakthrough+1
opportunities+1
Risk Factors (Item 1A)
43,341 words
Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should consider and read carefully all of the risks and uncertainties described below, as well as the other information in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our consolidated financial statements and the related notes appearing elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” before deciding whether to invest in our common stock. The risks described below are not the only ones facing us. The following risks or additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently believe to be immaterial could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. In such an event, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you may lose all or part of your investment.
This Annual Report on Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements and estimates that involve risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial also may impair our business operations. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in our forward-looking statements as a result of specific factors, including the risks and uncertainties described below.
No section text extracted for this filing. The 10-K may use a non-standard template that the parser doesn't recognize - the original doc is still linked in the Stats tab.
Risks Related to Our Limited Operating History, Financial Condition and Need for Additional Capital
We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history, which may make it difficult to evaluate our current business and predict our future success and viability. We have incurred significant financial losses since our inception and anticipate that we will continue to incur significant financial losses for the foreseeable future.
We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history. We were formed in December 2018, and our operations to date have been limited to pre-commercial activities. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to generate revenue, obtain regulatory approval, manufacture any product on a commercial scale or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Our limited operating history as a company makes any assessment of our future success and viability subject to significant uncertainty. We will encounter risks and difficulties frequently experienced by early-stage biopharmaceutical companies in rapidly evolving fields, and we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfullyovercome such risks and difficulties. If we do not address these risks and difficultiessuccessfully, our business will suffer.
We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to clinical development and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity and working capital. Our net losses totale d $138.0 million a nd $68.0 million f or the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we have not yet generated revenues. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, ficerafusp alfa.
We anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially if, and as, we:
• advance ficerafusp alfa through clinical development;
• seek regulatory approvals for ficerafusp alfa and any future our product candidates that successfully complete clinical trials;
• hire additional clinical, quality control, medical, scientific and other technical personnel to support the clinical development of ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidate;
• experience an increase in headcount as we expand our market development and pre-commercial planning activities;
• undertake any pre-commercial or commercial activities to establish sales, marketing and distribution capabilities;
• advance any future product candidates into clinical development;
Table of Contents
• seek to identify, acquire and develop additional product candidates, including through business development efforts to invest in or in-license other technologies or product candidates;
• maintain, expand and protect our intellectual property portfolio;
• make any payments due under our license agreements and any potential milestones, royalties or other payments due under any future in-license or collaboration agreements; and
• make milestone, royalty, interest or other payments due under any future financing or other arrangements with third parties.
Biopharmaceutical product development entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any potential product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval, secure market access and reimbursement and become commercially viable, and therefore any investment in us is highly speculative. Accordingly, before making an investment in us, you should consider our prospects, factoring in the costs, uncertainties, delays and difficulties frequently encountered by companies in clinical development, especially clinical-stage biopharmaceutical companies such as ours. Any predictions you make about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they would otherwise be if we had a longer operating history or a history of successfully developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products. We may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known or unknown factors in achieving our business objectives.
Additionally, our expenses could increase beyond our expectations if we are required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, or the FDA, Health Canada, the European Medicines Agency, or the EMA, or other comparable regulatory authorities to perform clinical trials in addition to those that we currently expect, or if there are any delays in establishing appropriate manufacturing arrangements for or in completing our clinical trials or the development of any of our product candidate.
If we are unable to raise capital when needed, or on acceptable terms, we may be unable to complete the development and commercialization of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates.
Developing biopharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. We expect our expenses to continue to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct clinical trials of, and seek regulatory and marketing approval for, ficerafusp alfa. Even if ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates are approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. To date, we have funded our operations principally through our initial public offering, or our IPO, our ATM Program (as defined below), the February 2026 Offering (as defined below), and private financings and may in the future fund operations through additional sales of our securities, including under our ATM Program. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we continue the clinical development of ficerafusp alfa, continue to develop and deploy our bifunctional approach, commence additional preclinical studies and clinical trials, and continue to identify and develop additional product candidates either through internal development or through acquisitions or in-licensing product candidates.
As of December 31, 2025, we had $414.8 million of cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, including the net proceeds from our February 2026 Offering, will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the first half of 2029. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could utilize our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop ficerafusp alfa. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:
• the scope, timing, progress, costs and results of clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa or the discovery and preclinical development of any future product candidates;
• the number of clinical trials required for regulatory approval of ficerafusp alfa or future product candidates;
• the costs, timing and outcome of regulatory review of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates;
Table of Contents
• the costs associated with acquiring or licensing additional product candidates, technologies or assets, including the timing and amount of any milestones, royalties or other payments due in connection with our acquisitions and licenses;
• the cost of manufacturing clinical and commercial supplies of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates;
• the costs and timing of preparing, filing and prosecuting patent applications, maintaining and enforcing our intellectual property rights and defending any intellectual property-related claims, including any claims by third parties that we are infringing upon their intellectual property rights;
• the effectiveness of our approach at identifying target patient populations and utilizing our approach to enrich our patient population in our clinical trials;
• our ability to maintain existing, and establish new, strategic collaborations or other arrangements and the financial terms of any such agreements, including the timing and amount of any future milestone, royalty or other payments due under any such agreement;
• the costs and timing of future commercialization activities, including manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution, for any of our product candidates for which we receive marketing approval;
• the revenue, if any, received from commercial sales of our product candidates for which we receive marketing approval;
• expenses to attract, hire and retain skilled personnel;
• the costs of operating as a public company;
• our ability to establish a commercially viable pricing structure and obtain approval for coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party and government payors;
• the effect of macroeconomic trends including inflation and rising interest rates;
• addressing any potential supply chain interruptions or delays;
• the effect of competing technological and market developments; and
• the extent to which we acquire or invest in business, products and technologies.
Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with research and development of product candidates, we may not be able to accurately predict the timing or amount of our working capital requirements. In addition, if we obtain regulatory approval for ficerafusp alfa, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution which make it difficult to predict when or if we will be able to achieve or maintain profitability. Furthermore, we expect to continue to incur increased costs associated with operating as a public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in order to support our continuing operations. Our ability to raise additional funds will depend on financial, economic, political and market conditions and other factors, over which we may have no or limited control. Additional funds may not be available when we need them, on terms that are acceptable to us, or at all. If we fail to obtain necessary capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, it could force us to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our product development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations.
Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish rights to ficerafusp alfa.
Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our operations with our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, the net proceeds from our IPO, sales of our common stock under our ATM Program, marketable securities, equity financings, or any future equity or debt financings and upfront and milestone and royalties payments, if any, received under any future licenses or collaborations. In the future, if we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities or issue any equity or convertible debt securities in connection with a collaboration agreement or other contractual arrangement, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a holder of our common stock. In addition, the possibility of such issuance may cause the market price of our common stock to decline. In October 2025, we filed a Registration Statement pursuant to which we may issue up to $400.0 million in shares of our common stock, preferred stock, debt securities, warrants and/or units. Concurrent with the filing of the Registration Statement, we entered into a common stock sales agreement, dated October 3, 2025, by and between the Company and TD Securities (USA) LLC, acting as the sales agent, to establish an at-the-market offering program pursuant to which we may offer and sell shares of our common stock from time to time, or the ATM Program. In connection with the ATM Program, we filed a prospectus with the Registration Statement for the offer and sale of up to $150.0 million of shares of common stock from time to time through the sales agents, or the ATM Prospectus. As of December 31, 2025, we have sold 1,604,000 shares of
Table of Contents
common stock under our ATM Program for aggregate net proceeds to us of $29.5 million. In February 2026, we entered into an underwriting agreement with Morgan Stanley & Co. LLC, TD Securities (USA) LLC and BofA Securities, Inc., as representatives of the underwriters named therein, pursuant to which we issued and sold an aggregate of 8,581,250 shares of our common stock at a price to the public of $16.00 per share, which included full exercise of the underwriters’ option to purchase 1,406,250 additional shares, and pre-funded warrants to purchase up to 2,200,000 shares of common stock to the underwriters at a public offering price of $15.9999 per pre-funded warrant, or the February 2026 Offering. The February 2026 Offering resulted in net proceeds to us of approximately $161.8 million, after deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and offering expenses. As market conditions permit, we may offer and sell securities under the Registration Statement, including through the ATM Program or additional equity financings, which may cause dilution to our stockholders or impact the market price of our common stock.
Debt financing, if available, may result in increased fixed payment obligations and involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends or acquiring, selling or licensing intellectual property rights or assets, which could adversely impact our ability to conduct our business.
If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or marketing, distribution or licensing arrangements with third parties in the future, we may have to relinquishvaluable rights to our intellectual property, technologies, future revenue streams or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. We could also be required to seek funds through arrangements with collaborators or others at an earlier stage than otherwise would be desirable. Any of these occurrences may have a material adverse effect on our business, operating results and prospects.
We maintain the majority of our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities in accounts with major U.S. and multi-national financial institutions, and our deposits at certain of these institutions exceed insured limits. Market conditions and changes in financial regulations and policies can impact the viability of these institutions. In the event of failure of any of the financial institutions where we maintain our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, there can be no assurance that we would be able to access uninsured funds in a timely manner or at all. Any inability to access or delay in accessing these funds could adversely affect our business and financial position. In addition, changes in regulations governing financial institutions are beyond our control and difficult to predict; consequently, the impact of such changes on our business and results of operations is difficult to predict and may have an adverse effect on us.
Risks Related to Our Business Operations and Industry
Our business is highly dependent on the success of ficerafusp alfa. If we are unable to successfully complete clinical development, obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize ficerafusp alfa, or if we experience delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.
To date, as an organization, we have not completed the development of any product candidates, and ficerafusp alfa remains in clinical development. Our future success and ability to generate revenue from ficerafusp alfa is dependent on our ability to successfully develop and commercialize ficerafusp alfa or any of our future product candidates. If any of our product candidates encounters safety or efficacy problems, development delays or regulatory issues or other problems, our development plans and business would be materially harmed.
We may not have the financial resources to continue development of ficerafusp alfa if we experience any issues that delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or our ability to commercialize, ficerafusp alfa, including:
• our inability to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities that ficerafusp alfa is safe and effective;
• delays or failure in obtaining the necessary approvals from regulators to commence a clinical trial or a suspension, termination, or hold, of a clinical trial once commenced;
• conditions imposed by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other comparable regulatory authorities regarding the scope or design of our clinical trials;
• delays or failures in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with clinical trial sites or contract research organizations, or CROs;
• poor effectiveness of ficerafusp alfa during clinical trials;
Table of Contents
• better than expected performance of control arms, such as placebo groups, which could lead to negative or inconclusive results from our clinical trials;
• higher than anticipated clinical trial or manufacturing costs;
• unfavorable FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other comparable regulatory authority inspection and review of our clinical trial sites;
• failure of our CROs, clinical trial sites, or investigators to comply with regulatory requirements or the clinical trial protocol or otherwise meet their contractual obligations in a timely manner, or at all;
• delays and changes in regulatory requirements, policies and guidelines, including the imposition of additional regulatory oversight around clinical testing generally or with respect to our therapies in particular; or
• varying interpretations of data by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA and other comparable regulatory authorities.
We face significant competition from other biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies, and our operating results will suffer if we fail to compete effectively.
The biotechnology industry is intensely competitive and subject to rapid and significant technological change. ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates may face competition from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies, universities and other research institutions and from products and therapies that currently exist or are being developed, some of which products and therapies we may not currently know about. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, manufacturing, marketing, product development, technical and human resources than we do. Large pharmaceutical companies, in particular, have extensive experience in clinical testing, obtaining marketing approvals, recruiting patients and manufacturing pharmaceutical products, and they may also have products that have been approved or are in late stages of development, and collaborative arrangements in our target markets with leading companies and research institutions. Established pharmaceutical companies may also invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make the product candidates that we develop obsolete. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. As a result of all of these factors, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection and/or FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other regulatory approval or discovering, developing and commercializing products in our field before we do, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market.
Our competitors may obtain FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other regulatory approval of their product candidates more rapidly than we may or may obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit our ability to develop or commercialize ficerafusp alfa. Our competitors may also develop drugs or discovery platforms that are more effective, more convenient, more widely used or less costly than ficerafusp alfa or, in the case of drugs, have a better safety profile than ficerafusp alfa. These competitors may also be more successful than us in manufacturing and marketing their products and have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development.
There are a large number of companies developing or marketing treatments for cancer, including many major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies. In addition, numerous compounds are in clinical development for cancer treatment. Many of these companies are well-capitalized and have significant clinical experience. More specifically, we expect to compete with commercially available therapies for the treatment of head and neck squamous cell carcinoma, or HNSCC, including pembrolizumab (marketed as Keytruda by Merck & Co); the combination of pembrolizumab, platinum chemotherapy and 5-fluorouracil; and the combination of cetuximab (marketed as Erbitux by Eli Lilly & Company in the U.S. and by Merck KGaA outside of the U.S.), platinum chemotherapy and 5-fluorouracil. In addition, there are numerous companies that are developing new treatments for HNSCC, including but not limited to Akeso, Inc., AstraZeneca PLC, AVEO Pharmaceuticals, Inc., BioAtla Inc., BioNTech SE, Corbus Pharmaceuticals Holdings Inc., GSK plc, InhibRx Biosciences, Inc., Johnson & Johnson, Merus N.V. (a Genmab A/S company), PDS Biotechnology Corp, Pyxis Oncology, Inc., and Rakuten Medical, Inc.
Smaller and other early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates. In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry is characterized by
Table of Contents
rapid technological change. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change, we may be unable to compete effectively. Technological advances or products developed by our competitors may render ficerafusp alfa obsolete, less competitive or uneconomical.
Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient, have a broader label, are marketed more effectively, are reimbursed or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors may also obtain patent protection or other intellectual property rights that limit our ability to develop or commercialize ficerafusp alfa. Even if ficerafusp alfa achieves marketing approval, it may be priced at a significant premium over competitive products if any have been approved by then, resulting in reduced competitiveness. If we do not compete successfully, we may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from any product candidate for which we obtain marketing approval and may not become or remain profitable.
Due to the significant resources required for the development of our pipeline, and depending on our ability to access capital, we must prioritize the development of certain product candidates over others. Moreover, we may fail to expend our limited resources on product candidates or indications that may have been more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success.
Our initial focus is the development of ficerafusp alfa in HNSCC. We initiated the Phase 2/3 FORTIFI-HN01 pivotal trial of ficerafusp alfa in combination with pembrolizumab in first-line, or 1L, recurrent/metastatic, or R/M, human papillomavirus, or HPV, -negative HNSCC and, more generally, we seek to bring transformative bifunctional therapies to patients with solid tumors.
Due to the significant resources required for the development of our product candidates, we must decide which product candidates and indications to pursue and advance and the amount of resources to allocate to each. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, development, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates, therapeutic areas or indications may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from betteropportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the viability or market potential of any of our product candidates or misread trends in the pharmaceutical industry, in particular for disorders of the brain and nervous system, our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially and adversely affected. As a result, we may fail to capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities, be required to forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or other diseases and disease pathways that may later prove to have greater commercial potential than those we choose to pursue, or relinquishvaluable rights to such product candidates through collaboration, licensing or royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been advantageous for us to invest additional resources to retain sole development and commercialization rights.
We may seek to grow our business through acquisitions or investments in new or complementary businesses, products or technologies, through the licensing of products or technologies from third parties or other strategic alliances. The failure to manage acquisitions, investments, licenses or other strategic alliances, or the failure to integrate them with our existing business, could have a material adverse effect on our operating results, dilute our stockholders’ ownership, increase our debt or cause us to incur significant expense.
Our success depends on our ability to continually enhance and broaden our product offerings in response to changing clinician and patients’ needs, competitive technologies and market pressures. Accordingly, from time to time we may consider opportunities to acquire, make investments in or license other technologies, products and businesses that may enhance our capabilities, complement our existing products and technologies or expand the breadth of our markets or customer base. Potential and completed acquisitions, strategic investments, licenses and other alliances involve numerous risks, including:
• difficulty assimilating or integrating acquired or licensed technologies, products, employees or business operations;
• issues maintaining uniform standards, procedures, controls and policies;
• unanticipated costs associated with acquisitions or strategic alliances, including the assumption of unknown or contingent liabilities and the incurrence of debt or future write-offs of intangible assets or goodwill;
Table of Contents
• diversion of management’s attention from our core business and disruption of ongoing operations;
• adverse effects on existing business relationships with suppliers, sales agents, health care facilities, surgeons and other health care providers;
• risks associated with entering new markets in which we have limited or no experience;
• potential losses related to investments in other companies;
• potential loss of key employees of acquired businesses; and
• increased legal and accounting compliance costs.
We do not know if we will be able to identify acquisitions or strategic relationships we deem suitable, whether we will be able to successfully complete any such transactions on favorable terms, if at all, or whether we will be able to successfully integrate any acquired business, product or technology into our business or retain any key personnel, suppliers, sales agent, health care facilities, physicians or other health care providers. Our ability to successfully grow through strategic transactions depends upon our ability to identify, negotiate, complete and integrate suitable target businesses, technologies or products and to obtain any necessary financing. These efforts could be expensive and time-consuming and may disrupt our ongoing business and prevent management from focusing on our operations.
To finance any acquisitions, investments or strategic alliances, we may choose to issue shares of our common stock as consideration, which could dilute the ownership of our stockholders. If the price of our common stock is low or volatile, we may be unable to consummate any acquisitions, investments or strategic alliances using our common stock as consideration. Additional funds may not be available on terms that are favorable to us, or at all.
Our employees, independent contractors, consultants and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements.
We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other illegal activity by our current and any future employees, independent contractors, consultants, contract manufacturing organizations, or CMOs, and vendors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless, and/or negligent conduct that fails to comply with FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other regulations, provide true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA and other comparable regulatory authorities, comply with manufacturing standards we may establish, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately, or discloseunauthorized activities to us. If we obtain FDA approval of any of our product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the U.S., our potential exposure under these laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with these laws are likely to increase. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and seriousharm to our reputation. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects.
We, our collaborators and our service providers are subject to a variety of privacy and data security laws, regulations and contractual obligations, which may require us to incur substantial compliance costs, and any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with them could expose us to significant fines and other penalties and otherwise harm our business and operations.
The legislative and regulatory framework for the collection, use, safeguarding, sharing, transfer and other processing of personal information worldwide is rapidly evolving and is likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future. Globally, several jurisdictions, including those in which we operate or collect personal information, have established their own data security and privacy frameworks with which we must comply.
In the U.S., numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including federal health information privacy laws, state information security and 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,
Table of Contents
disclosure and protection of health-related and other personal information, could apply to our operations or the operations of our collaborators and service providers. In particular, regulations promulgated pursuant to the federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, establish privacy and security standards that limit the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information, or protected health information, and impose requirements regarding the privacy and security of individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms, for covered entities, or certain healthcare providers, health plans and healthcare clearinghouses, and their business associates that provide services to the covered entity that involve individually identifiable health information and their subcontractors that use, disclose or otherwise process individually identifiable health information. While pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies are typically not directly regulated by HIPAA, our business may be indirectly impacted by HIPAA in our interactions with providers, payors, and others that have HIPAA compliance obligations. If we are unable to properly protect the privacy and security of protected health information, we could be found to have violated these privacy and security laws and/or breached certain contracts. Further, if we fail to comply with applicable privacy laws, including applicable HIPAA privacy and security standards, we could face significant civil and criminalpenalties. U.S. Department of Health & Human Services, or HHS, enforcement activity can result in financial liability and reputational harm, and responses to such enforcement activity can consume significant internal resources.
At the state level, numerous states have enacted comprehensive data privacy and security laws, rules and regulations while other states have enacted laws focused on more narrow aspects of privacy. The existence of comprehensive privacy laws in different states in the country would make our compliance obligations more complex and costly and may increase the likelihood that we may be subject to enforcement actions or otherwise incur liability for noncompliance. Additionally, some states have passed laws focused specifically on health privacy. In the state of Washington, for example, the My Health My Data Act, which has a private right of action that further increases the relevant compliance risk, requires regulated entities to obtain consent to collect health-related information and grants consumers certain rights, including to request deletion of their information. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data. In addition, other states have proposed and/or passed legislation that regulates the privacy and/or security of certain specific types of information. For example, a small number of states, including Illinois and Texas, have passed laws that regulate biometric data specifically. Although many of the existing state privacy laws exempt clinical trial information and health information governed by HIPAA, future privacy and data protection laws may be broader in scope. These various privacy and security laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products.
Regulators and legislators in the U.S. are increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, the Department of Justice’s January 8, 2025, rule on “Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons,” prohibits data brokerage transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The regulations also restrict certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls. Actual or allegedviolations of these regulations may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions and may result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs.
If we conduct clinical trials in the European Economic Area, or the EEA, and/or the United Kingdom, or the U.K., we will be subject to additional, more stringent privacy laws in other jurisdictions, such as the General Data Protection Regulation, or the EU GDPR, as well as other national data protection legislation in force in relevant EU Member States, with respect to the EEA, and the U.K. General Data Protection Regulation, or the U.K. GDPR, with respect to the U.K. We refer to the U.K. GDPR together with the EU GDPR as the “GDPR.” The GDPR is wide-ranging in scope and imposes numerous requirements on companies that process personal data, including strict requirements relating to processing of sensitive data (such as health data), ensuring there is a legal basis or condition to justify the processing of personal data, where required strict requirements relating to obtaining consent of individuals, disclosures about how personal information is to be used, limitations on retention of information, implementing safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, where required providing notification of data breaches, maintaining records of processing activities, documenting data protection impact assessments where there is high risk processing and taking certain measures when engaging third-party processors.
Table of Contents
The GDPR also imposes strict rules on the transfer of personal data to countries outside the EEA or the U.K., including the United States (see below), and permits data protection authorities to impose large penalties for violations of the GDPR, including potential fines of up to €20 million (£17.5 million GBP) or 4% of annual global revenues, whichever is greater. The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR. Non-compliance could also result in the imposition of orders to stop data processing activities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position and results of operations.
When subject to GDPR, we will be required to put in place mechanisms to ensure compliance, including as implemented by national laws of EU Member States which may partially deviate from the EU GDPR and impose different and more restrictive obligations from country to country. Compliance with the GDPR will be a rigorous and time-intensive process that may increase our cost of doing business or require us to change our business practices, and despite those efforts, there is a risk that we may be subject to fines and penalties, litigation, and reputational harm in connection with our European and U.K. activities.
The U.K. GDPR and the U.K. Data Protection Act 2018 set out the U.K.’s data protection regime, which is independent from but, currently, aligned to the EU’s data protection regime. The European Commission, or the EC, has adopted an adequacy decision in respect of transfers of personal data to the U.K. In December 2025, the European Commission adopted a decision to extend the validity of the U.K. adequacy decision for six years until December 2031, determining that the U.K. continues to offer a level of data protection that is “essentially equivalent” to the EU standards. This follows the U.K.’s adoption of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025, or the DUAA, on June 19, 2025. Like the EU GDPR, the U.K. GDPR restricts personal data transfers outside the U.K. to countries not regarded by the U.K. as providing adequate protection. The U.K. Government has confirmed that personal data transfers from the U.K. to the EEA remain free flowing. The respective provisions and enforcement of the EU GDPR and U.K. GDPR may further diverge in the future and create additional regulatory challenges and uncertainties.
In addition, we will be required to implement adequate safeguards to enable the transfer of personal data outside of the EEA or the U.K., in particular to the U.S., in compliance with the GDPR. In some cases, we may rely upon the EC’s approved standard contractual clauses to legitimize transfers of personal data out of the EEA from controllers or processors established outside the EEA (and not subject to the GDPR). The U.K. is not subject to the EC’s standard contractual clauses but has published its own transfer mechanism, the International Data Transfer Addendum/Agreement, which enables transfers from the U.K. Changes with respect to any of these matters may lead to additional costs and increase our overall risk exposure. The EU and U.S. have adopted its adequacy decision for the EU U.S. Data Privacy Framework, or the Framework, which entered into force on July 11, 2023. This Framework provides that the protection of personal data transferred between the EU and certified companies in the U.S. is comparable to that offered in the EU. Moreover, the U.K. Government adopted the Data Protection (Adequacy) Regulations 2023, also referred to as the “UK-U.S. Data Bridge”, which, since October 12, 2023 allows companies to transfer personal data from the U.K. to the U.S. on the basis of the Framework. This provides a further avenue to ensuring transfers to the U.S. are carried out in line with GDPR. However, the long-term validity of the Framework remains uncertain and it has already been challenged before European courts.
All of these evolving compliance and operational requirements impose significant costs, such as costs related to organizational changes, implementing additional protection technologies, training employees and engaging consultants and legal advisors, which are likely to increase over time. In addition, such requirements may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies, utilize management’s time and/or divert resources from other initiatives and projects. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with any applicable federal, state or foreign laws and regulations relating to data privacy and security could result in damage to our reputation, as well as proceedings or litigation by governmental agencies or other third parties, including class action privacy litigation in certain jurisdictions, which would subject us to significant fines, sanctions, awards, injunctions, penalties or judgments. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Additionally, the NIS 2 Directive, or NIS 2, is replacing the cybersecurity legal framework under the current NIS framework in the EU, aiming to ensure a high level of cybersecurity in the region. NIS 2 brings new medium and large organizations providing services in the EU within scope of the legal framework. It extends to additional sectors
Table of Contents
and expands the list of in-scope healthcare organizations, including to certain providers engaged in research and development of medicinal products. The new regime imposes direct obligations on management in respect of an in-scope organization ’ s compliance with NIS 2, requires covered organizations to put in place certain cyber risk management measures, strengthensincident reporting requirements and provides supervisory authorities with a greater oversight. The majority of obligations will come into force when national legislation implementing NIS 2 becomes effective in the relevant EU Member State. EU Member States had until October 17, 2024 to transpose NIS 2 into national legislation, although some countries have still not completed the transposition. As such, the cybersecurity regulatory landscape in the EU is currently fragmented and uncertain. To the extent we are subject to NIS 2, we will require additional investment of our resources in compliance programs. Under NIS 2 companies may be subject to administrative fines of up to the higher amount of €10 million or 2% of worldwide turnover.
If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our proprietary information, the value of ficerafusp alfa could be adversely affected.
In addition to patent protection, we also rely on other proprietary rights, including protection of trade secrets and/or confidential know-how, unpatented know-how and/or other proprietary information. We may rely on other proprietary rights, including protection of trade secrets, confidential know-how, unpatented know-how and/or other proprietary information to protect ficerafusp alfa, especially where patent protection is believed to be of limited value. However, trade secrets and/or confidential know-how are difficult to maintain as confidential. To maintain the confidentiality of this type of information, it is our policy to enter into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, advisors, collaborators, contractors (including CROs), and others upon the commencement of their relationships with us. These agreements require that all confidential information developed by the individual(s) or made known to the individual by us during the course of the individual’s relationship or work with us be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties. Our agreements with employees and our personnel policies also provide that any inventions conceived by the individual in the course of rendering services to us shall be our exclusive property. However, we may not obtain these agreements in all circumstances, and individuals with whom we have these agreements may not comply with their terms, intentionally or unintentionally. Thus, despite such agreement, such inventions may become assigned to third parties. In the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our trade secrets or proprietary information, these agreements, even if obtained, may not provide meaningful protection, particularly for our trade secrets or other confidential information. To the extent that our employees, consultants, contractors or others use technology or know-how owned by third parties in their work for us, disputes may arise between us and those third parties as to the rights in related inventions. To the extent that an individual who is not obligated to assign rights in intellectual property to us or a current or future licensor is rightfully an inventor of intellectual property, we may need to obtain an assignment or a license to that intellectual property from that individual, or a third party or from that individual’s assignee. Such assignment or license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. The disclosure of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and may materially harm our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Enforcing a claim that a third party obtained illegally and is using trade secrets and/or confidential know-how is expensive, time consuming and unpredictable. The enforceability of confidentiality agreements and theft of trade secret claims may vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction. 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. As such, adequate remedies may not exist in the event of unauthorized use or disclosure of our proprietary information.
In addition, others may independently discover or develop our trade secrets and proprietary information, and the existence of our own trade secrets affords no protection against such independent discovery. Such persons may even apply for patent protection in respect of the same. If successful in obtaining such patent protection, such persons could limit our use of our trade secrets and/or confidential know-how. Under certain circumstances and to guarantee our freedom to operate, we may also decide to publish some know-how to prevent others from obtaining patent rights covering such know-how.
Table of Contents
The use of new and evolving technologies, such as artificial intelligence, or AI, in our operations may result in spending material resources and presents risks and challenges that can impact our business including by posing security and other risks to our confidential information, proprietary information and personal information, and as a result we may be exposed to reputational harm and liability.
We may use and integrate AI into our operations both in our own development and implementation of AI and through the adoption of commercially available tools. Use of this technology could pose cybersecurity, data privacy, IT, intellectual property, regulatory, legal, operational, competitive, reputational and other risks and challenges that could affect our business. Specifically, risks related to accuracy, bias, artificial intelligence hallucinations, discrimination, harmful content, misinformation, fraud, scams, targeted attacks (including model poisoning or data poisoning), surveillance, data leakage, inequality, environmental harms, and other harms may flow from our development, use, or deployment of AI technologies. The use of certain AI technology can give rise to intellectual property risks, including by disclosing or otherwise compromising our confidential or proprietary intellectual property and intellectual property infringement, or by undermining our ability to assert or defend ownership rights in intellectual property created with the assistance of AI tools.
Additionally, we have seen increasing government and supranational regulation related to AI use and ethics, which may significantly increase the burden and cost of research, development and compliance in this area. For example, the EU began implementing the Artificial Intelligence Act, or the AI Act, on August 1, 2024, with a significant part of the law scheduled to come into effect in August 2026. As currently enacted, the AI Act, which may be amended as part of the EU’s Digital Omnibus, imposes significant obligations on providers and deployers of high risk AI systems, and encourages providers and deployers of AI systems to account for EU ethical principles in their development and use of these systems. The scope of requirements depends on judicial interpretations and forthcoming legislative amendments, and non-compliance can lead to significant fines.
In the U.S., the AI regulatory environment is complex and uncertain. Over the past year, states have advanced, and in some cases passed, dozens of laws focusing on AI governance and regulation, including on deployment of AI in healthcare settings. At the federal level, the Trump Administration has endorsed a federal moratorium on the enforcement of state AI laws, including through a December 11, 2025, executive order on “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence.” So far, these efforts have not been successful at curtailing state action on AI regulation, contributing to a complicated legislative patchwork, which may be litigated in state and federal courts. If we deploy AI systems that are governed by these laws or regulations, we may be required to adopt higher standards of data quality, transparency, and human oversight, and adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements.
Our vendors may in turn incorporate AI tools into their own offerings, and the providers of these AI tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to privacy and data security. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of personal information, confidential information and intellectual property. In addition, the use of generative AI models in our internal or third-party systems may create new attack surfaces or methods for adversaries, which could impact us and our vendors. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business.
Risks Related to the Discovery and Development of ficerafusp alfa or Future Product Candidates
Our business is dependent on our ability to advance ficerafusp alfa and future product candidates through clinical trials, obtain marketing approval and ultimately commercialize them.
Our ability to generate product revenues, which we do not expect will occur for several years, if ever, will depend heavily on the successful development and eventual regulatory approval and commercialization of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates we develop, which may never occur. Our current product candidate, ficerafusp alfa, remains in clinical development. Ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates we develop will require additional preclinical or clinical development, management of clinical, preclinical and manufacturing activities, marketing approval in the U.S., Canada and other jurisdictions, demonstration of effectiveness to pricing and reimbursement authorities, sufficient manufacturing supply for both preclinical and clinical development and
Table of Contents
commercial production, building of a commercial organization and substantial investment and significant marketing efforts before we generate any revenues from product sales.
The clinical and commercial success of ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates will depend on several factors, including the following:
• timely and successful completion of our clinical trials;
• sufficiency of our financial and other resources to complete the necessary clinical trials and any additional preclinical studies;
• our plans to successfully submit new Investigational New Drug, or IND, applications with the FDA for ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates;
• successful enrollment in, and completion of clinical trials;
• successful data from our clinical program that supports an acceptable risk-benefit profile of our product candidates in the intended patient populations;
• our ability to establish agreements with third-party manufacturers on a timely and cost-efficient manner;
• whether we are required by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities to conduct additional clinical trials or other studies beyond those planned or anticipated to support approval of our product candidates;
• acceptance of our proposed indications and the primary endpoint assessments evaluated in the clinical trials of our product candidates by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities;
• receipt and maintenance of timely marketing approvals from applicable regulatory authorities;
• successfully launching commercial sales of our product candidates, if approved;
• the prevalence, duration and severity of potential side effects or other safety issues experienced with our product candidates, if approved;
• entry into collaborations to further the development of our product candidates;
• obtaining and maintaining patent and trade secret protection or regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates;
• acceptance of the benefits and uses of our product candidates, if approved, by patients, the medical community and third-party payors;
• maintaining a continued acceptable safety, tolerability and efficacy profile of any product candidates following approval;
• our compliance with any post-approval requirements imposed on our products, such as post-marketing studies, a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, or additional requirements that might limit the promotion, advertising, distribution or sales of our products or make the products cost prohibitive;
• competing effectively with other therapies;
• obtaining and maintaining healthcare coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors; and
• enforcing and defending intellectual property rights and claims.
These factors, many of which are beyond our control, could cause us to fall behind our competitors, experience significant delays or an inability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize ficerafusp alfa or future product candidates, and could otherwise materially harm our business. Successful completion of preclinical studies and clinical trials does not mean that ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates we develop will receive regulatory approval. Even if regulatory approvals are obtained, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our current and any future product candidates we develop, which would materially harm our business. If we are not able to generate sufficient revenue through the sale of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidate, we may not be able to continue our business operations or achieveprofitability.
Clinical development involves a lengthy and expensive process with uncertain outcomes. We may incur additional costs and experience delays in developing and commercializing or be unable to develop or commercialize ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates.
To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe, pure and potent in humans and have a favorable risk-benefit profile. Clinical trials are expensive and can take many years to complete, with a highly uncertain outcome. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process and our future clinical trial results may not be successful. We may experience delays in completing our clinical trials or preclinical studies and initiating or completing additional clinical trials. We cannot be certain the ongoing and planned preclinical
Table of Contents
studies or clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa or any other future product candidates will begin on time, not require redesign, enroll an adequate number of subjects on time or be completed on schedule, if at all. We may also experience numerous unforeseen events during our clinical trials that could delay or prevent our ability to receive marketing approval or commercialize the product candidates we develop, including:
• results from preclinical studies or clinical trials may not be predictive of results from later clinical trials of any product candidate;
• the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other regulatory authorities, Institutional Review Boards, or IRBs, or independent ethics committees may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site;
• the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or regulatory authorities may require us to submit additional data such as long-term toxicology studies, or impose other requirements on us, before permitting us to initiate a clinical trial;
• we may experience delays in reaching, or fail to reach, agreement on acceptable terms with prospective trial sites and prospective CROs, as the terms of these agreements can be subject to extensive negotiation and vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites;
• clinical trials of any product candidate may fail to show safety, purity or potency, or may produce negative or inconclusive results, which may cause us to decide, or regulators to require us, to conduct additional nonclinical studies or clinical trials or which may cause us to decide to abandon product candidate development programs;
• the number of patients required for clinical trials may be larger than we anticipate, or we may have difficulty in recruiting and enrolling patients to participate in clinical trials, including as a result of the size and nature of the patient population, the proximity of patients to clinical trial sites, eligibility criteria for the clinical trial, the nature of the clinical trial protocol, the availability of approved effective treatments for the relevant disease and competition from other clinical trial programs for similar indications and clinical trial subjects;
• enrollment in these clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or participants may drop out of these clinical trials or may fail to return for post-treatment follow-up at a higher rate than we anticipate;
• our CROs and other third-party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, or may deviate from the clinical trial protocol or drop out of the trial, which may require that we add new clinical trial sites or investigators;
• we may elect to, or regulators, IRBs or ethics committees may require that we or our investigators, suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that participants are being exposed to unacceptable health risks;
• any of our product candidates could cause undesirable side effects that could result in significant negative consequences, including the inability to enter clinical development or receive regulatory approval;
• the cost of preclinical or nonclinical testing and studies and clinical trials of any product candidates may be greater than we anticipate;
• we may face hurdles in addressing subject safety concerns that arise during the course of a trial, causing us or our investigators, regulators, IRBs or ethics committees to suspend or terminate trials, or reports may arise from nonclinical or clinical testing of other cancer therapies that raise safety or efficacy concerns about our product candidates;
• the supply, quality or timeliness of delivery of materials for product candidates we develop or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials may be insufficient or inadequate; and
• we may need to change the manufacturing site and potentially the CMO for our product candidates from those that are able to produce clinical supply for our clinical trials to those with the capacity and ability to perform commercial manufacturing and/or the production of clinical material for our later stage clinical trials.
We could encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, or by the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, ethics committees or the Data and Safety Monitoring Board, or the DSMB, for such trial or by the FDA, Health Canada, competent authorities in the EU, the Medicines and Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency, or the MHRA, or other regulatory authorities. Such authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, Health Canada, competent authorities in the EU, the MHRA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product candidate, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding
Table of Contents
to continue the clinical trial. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of our product candidates. The FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other regulatory authorities may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials. Further, the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials. For example, we are conducting and may in the future conduct additional “open-label” clinical trials. An “open-label” clinical trial is one where both the patient and investigator know whether the patient is receiving the investigational product candidate or either an existing approved drug or placebo. Most typically, open-label clinical trials test only the investigational product candidate and sometimes may do so at different dose levels. Open-label clinical trials are subject to various limitations that may exaggerate any therapeutic effect as patients may be subject to a “patient bias” where patients perceive their symptoms to have improved merely due to their awareness of receiving an experimental treatment. Moreover, patients selected for early clinical trials often include the most severe sufferers and their symptoms may have been bound to improve notwithstanding the new treatment. In addition, open-label clinical trials may be subject to an “investigator bias” where those assessing and reviewing the physiological outcomes of the clinical trials are aware of which patients have received treatment and may interpret the information of the treated group more favorably given this knowledge. For example, in our ongoing Phase 1/1b trial, objective response rate as determined using RECIST 1.1 criteria is assessed by the trial investigators who may be aware of the trial treatment, patient history or other information that could impact their choices in applying the rules and conventions of RECIST 1.1. The published literature demonstrates a consistent decrease in response rate when investigator assessed response rates are verified by independent radiology review.
Principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and may receive cash or other compensation in connection with such services. If these relationships and any related compensation result in perceived or actual conflicts of interest, or a regulatory authority concludes that the financial relationship may have affected the interpretation of the trial, the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site may be questioned and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized, which could result in the delay or rejection of the marketing application we submit. Any such delay or rejection could prevent or delay us from commercializing ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates.
If we experience delays in the completion, or termination, of any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates will be harmed and our ability to generate product revenues from any of these product candidates will be delayed. In addition, any delays in completing our clinical trials will increase our costs, slow down the development and approval process for our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commence product sales and generate revenues. Significant clinical trial delays could also allow our competitors to bring products to market before we do or shorten any periods during which we have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates. Any such events would impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business and results of operations.
Any of these occurrences may significantly harm our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of our product candidates or result in the development of our product candidates stopping early.
We are currently conducting, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates outside the U.S., and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials.
We are currently conducting, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates outside the U.S., and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such trials. We are currently conducting clinical trials in the U.S. and Canada, and we expect to continue to conduct trials internationally in the future. The acceptance of data from clinical trials conducted outside the U.S. or another jurisdiction by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the basis for marketing approval in the U.S., the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice, (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to good clinical practice, or GCP, regulations, and (iii) the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means.
Table of Contents
Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials are subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the U.S. or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates that we may develop being delayed or not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.
Positive results from preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of future results. Initial positive results in any of our clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when the trial is completed or in later stage trials.
The results of preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of clinical trials. Preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials are primarily designed to (i) test safety, (ii) study pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics and (iii) understand the side effects of product candidates at various doses and schedules, and the results of any early-stage clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage, large-scale efficacy clinical trials. In addition, initial success in clinical trials may not be indicative of results obtained when such trials are completed. There can be no assurance that any of our current or future clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support further clinical development of any of our product candidates. There is a high failure rate for drugs and biological products proceeding through clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in clinical development even after achieving promising results in earlier studies, and any such setbacks in our clinical development could have a material adverse effect on our business and operating results.
Even if our clinical trials are completed, the results may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. Data obtained from preclinical and clinical activities are subject to varying interpretations, which may delay, limit or prevent regulatory approval. In addition, the results of our preclinical studies may not be predictive of the results of outcomes in human clinical trials. For example, ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates may demonstrate different chemical, biological and pharmacological properties in patients than they do in laboratory studies or may interact with human biological systems in unforeseen or harmful ways. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show desired pharmacological properties or produce the necessary safety and efficacy results despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. Even if we are able to initiate and complete clinical trials, the results may not be sufficient to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates. In addition, we may experience regulatory delays or rejections as a result of many factors, including changes in regulatory policy during the period of our product candidate development. Any such delays could negatively impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Interim and preliminary results from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit, validation and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data.
From time to time, we may publish interim data, including interim top-line results or preliminary results from our clinical trials. Interim data and results from our clinical trials are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Preliminary or top-line results also remain subject to audit, validation and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the interim and preliminary data we previously published. As a result, interim and preliminary data may not be predictive of final results and should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. Differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects and may cause the trading price of our common stock to fluctuate significantly.
Furthermore, third parties, including regulatory authorities, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or limit commercial prospects for, the particular product candidate. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is
Table of Contents
typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine to disclose. If regulatory authorities disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates may cause undesirable side effects or have other properties when used alone or in combination with other approved products or investigational new drugs that could halt their clinical development, delay or prevent their regulatory approval, limit their commercial potential or result in significant negative consequences.
Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through lengthy, complex and expensive preclinical testing and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe, pure and potent for use in each target indication, and failures can occur at any stage of testing. As with most biological products, use of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates could be associated with side effects or adverse events which can vary in severity from minor reactions to death and in frequency from infrequent to prevalent. There have been seriousadverse side effects reported in response to product therapeutics and bispecifics in oncology.
EGFR-targeted drugs have been observed to cause side effects, predominantly related to skin toxicity and rash, and TGF-β inhibitors have been shown to have side effects primarily related to bleeding. While we have observed these side effects during our studies, the severity of these has been minimal but additional or more severe treatment-related side effects may emerge at a later time in our trials. In addition to any potential side effects caused by the product or product candidate, the administration process or related procedures also can cause adverse side effects. If unacceptableadverse events occur, our clinical trials or any future marketing authorization could be suspended or terminated. Additionally, we may be required to repeat or conduct additional clinical trials or nonclinical studies for our product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate. There can be no assurance that ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates will not demonstrate unacceptable toxicities in later testing that may render it unsafe or intolerable.
If unacceptable side effects arise in the development of our product candidates, we, the FDA, the IRBs at the institutions in which our trials are conducted or the DSMB could suspend or terminate our clinical trials or the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could order us to cease clinical trials or deny approval of our product candidates for any or all targeted indications. Treatment-related side effects could also affect patient recruitment or the ability of enrolled patients to complete any of our clinical trials or result in potential product liability claims. In addition, these side effects may not be appropriately recognized or managed by the treating medical staff. We expect to have to train medical personnel using our product candidates to understand the side effect profiles for our clinical trials and upon any commercialization of any of our product candidates. Inadequate training in recognizing or managing the potential side effects of our product candidates could result in patient injury or death. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.
Although ficerafusp alfa and future product candidates have undergone and will undergo safety testing to the extent possible and, where applicable, under such conditions discussed with regulatory authorities, not all adverse effects of drugs can be predicted or anticipated. Antibody therapeutics and bispecifics and their method of action of harnessing the body’s immune system are powerful and could lead to serious side effects that we only discover in clinical trials or during commercial marketing. Unforeseen side effects could arise either during clinical development or after our product candidates have been approved by regulatory authorities and the approved product has been marketed, resulting in the exposure of additional patients. So far, we have not demonstrated that ficerafusp alfa is safe in humans, and we cannot predict if ongoing or future clinical trials will do so. If ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy in clinical trials or do not gain marketing approval, we will not be able to generate revenue and our business will be harmed.
In addition, we intend to pursue our product candidates in combination with other therapies and may develop future product candidates in combination with other therapies, which exposes us to additional risks relating to undesirable side effects or other properties. For example, the other therapies may lead to toxicities that are improperly attributed to our product candidates or the combination of our product candidates with other therapies may result in toxicities that the product candidate or other therapy does not produce when used alone.
Table of Contents
Even if we successfully advance our product candidates through clinical trials, such trials will likely only include a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure to our product candidates. As a result, we cannot be assured that adverse effects of our product candidates will not be uncovered when a significantly larger number of patients are exposed to the product candidate. Further, any clinical trial may not be sufficient to determine the effect and safety consequences of taking our product candidates over a multi-year period.
Even if we successfully develop a product candidate and it receives marketing approval, the FDA could require us to adopt a REMS to ensure that the benefits of treatment outweigh the risks for each potential patient, which may include, among other things, a medication guide outlining the risks of the product for distribution to patients, a communication plan to health care practitioners, extensive patient monitoring, or distribution systems and processes that are highly controlled, restrictive, and more costly than what is typical for the industry. If any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, and we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by such products, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including:
• regulatory authorities may limit, suspend, or withdraw their approval of the product or may refuse to approve supplemental applications for such product;
• we may be required to recall a product or change the way such product is administered to patients;
• additional restrictions may be imposed on the marketing of the particular product or the manufacturing processes for the product or any component thereof;
• regulatory authorities may require the addition of labeling statements, such as a “black box” warning or a contraindication;
• we may be required to implement a REMS or create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients;
• we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients;
• the product may become less competitive; and
• our reputation may suffer.
Any of the foregoing events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of the particular product candidate, if approved, and result in the loss of significant revenues, which would materially harm our business. In addition, if one or more of our product candidates or our antibody therapeutic development approach generally prove to be unsafe, our entire technology platform and pipeline could be affected, which would also materially harm our business.
Failure to adequately design a trial, or incorrect assumptions about the design of the trial, could adversely affect the ability to initiate the trial, enroll patients, complete the trial or obtain regulatory approval on the basis of the trial results, as well as lead to increased or unexpected costs and delayed timelines.
The design and implementation of clinical trials is a complex process. We may not successfully or cost-effectively design and implement clinical trials that achieve our desired clinical endpoints efficiently, or at all. A clinical trial that is not well designed may delay or even prevent initiation of the trial, can lead to increased difficulty in enrolling patients, may make it more difficult to obtain regulatory approval for the product candidate on the basis of the trial results, or, even if a product candidate is approved, could make it more difficult to commercialize the product successfully or obtain reimbursement from third-party payors. Additionally, a trial that is not well-designed could be inefficient or more expensive than it otherwise would have been, or we may incorrectly estimate the costs to implement the clinical trial, which could lead to a shortfall in funding. We also expect to continue to rely on third parties to conduct our clinical trials. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete clinical trials that are required for Biologics License Application, or BLA, submission and FDA approval of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining regulatory approvals of product candidates that we develop.
If we or our collaborators encounter difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise be adversely affected.
The successful and timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends on, among other things, our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the trial until the trial’s conclusion, including any follow-up period. We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including:
Table of Contents
• the patient eligibility criteria defined in the protocol;
• the nature and size of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints and the process for identifying patients;
• the number and location of participating and available clinical sites or patients;
• delays in, inability, or failure to add new clinical trial sites;
• the design of the trial;
• our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience;
• clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages and risks of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new products that may be approved for the indications we are investigating;
• the availability of competing commercially available therapies;
• our ability to obtain and maintain patient informed consents for participation in our clinical trials; and
• the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of the trials before completion or, because they may be late-stage cancer patients, will not survive the full terms of the clinical trials.
In addition, our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our current and potential future product candidates. It is also likely that we may compete with competitors developing product candidates in the same therapeutic areas for clinical trial sites. This competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such sites. Moreover, because our current and potential future product candidates may represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer treatment, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies, such as chemotherapy, rather than enroll patients in our ongoing or any future clinical trial.
Delays of difficulties in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing, outcome or completion of clinical trials, which would adversely affect our ability to advance the development of the product candidates we develop.
Preclinical development is uncertain. Any preclinical programs we pursue may experience delays or may never advance to clinical trials, which would adversely affect our ability to obtain regulatory approvals or commercialize these programs on a timely basis or at all.
The risk of failure for product candidates still in the discovery or preclinical stage is high. In addition, any one or more of our product candidates that have not yet entered the clinic may never advance into clinical development. In order to obtain FDA approval to market a new biologic we must demonstrate proof of safety, purity and potency, including efficacy, in humans. To meet these requirements, we will have to conduct adequate and well-controlled clinical trials. Before we can commence clinical trials for a product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical testing and studies that support our planned clinical trials in humans. We cannot be certain of the timely completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies and cannot predict if the FDA will accept our proposed clinical programs or if the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies will ultimately support the further development of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or similar applications for our preclinical programs on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs or similar applications will result in the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA, the MHRA or other regulatory authorities allowing clinical trials to begin.
Conducting preclinical testing is a lengthy, time-consuming and expensive process. The length of time of such testing may vary substantially according to the type, complexity and novelty of the program, and often can be several years or more per program. Delays associated with programs for which we are conducting preclinical testing and studies may cause us to incur additional operating expenses. The commencement and rate of completion of preclinical studies and clinical trials for a product candidate may be delayed by many factors, including but not limited to:
• an inability to generate sufficient preclinical or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation of clinical trials;
• delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory agencies on trial design; and
Table of Contents
• the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or foreign regulatory authorities not permitting the reliance on preclinical or other data from published scientific literature.
Failure to successfully develop and commercialize companion diagnostics with third party contractors for use with our product candidates could harm our ability to commercialize our product candidates.
We have engaged a third party and may engage additional third parties to develop companion diagnostics for our product candidates. At least in some cases, the FDA and similar regulatory authorities outside the United States may request or require the development and regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic as a condition to approving one or more of our product candidates. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities as medical devices and require separate clearance or approval prior to their commercialization. We do not have experience or capabilities in developing or commercializing diagnostics and are relying, and in the future plan to continue to rely, in large part on third parties to perform these functions.
In most cases, we will likely outsource the development, production and commercialization of companion diagnostics to third parties. By outsourcing these companion diagnostics to third parties, we become dependent on the efforts of our third-party contractors to successfully develop and commercialize these companion diagnostics. Our contractors:
• may not perform their obligations as expected;
• may encounter production difficulties that could constrain the supply of the companion diagnostic;
• may have difficultiesgaining acceptance of the use of the companion diagnostic in the clinical community;
• may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of such product; and
• may terminate their relationship with us.
We and our third-party collaborators may encounter difficulties in developing and obtaining approval for these companion diagnostics. Any delay or failure by us or third- party collaborators to develop or obtain regulatory approval of a companion diagnostic could delay or prevent approval of our related product candidates. Further, if any companion diagnostic for use with one of our product candidates fails to gain market acceptance, our ability to derive revenues from sales of such product candidate could be harmed. If our third-party contractors fail to commercialize such companion diagnostic, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with another diagnostic company to obtain supplies of an alternative diagnostic test for use in connection with such product candidate or do so on commercially reasonable terms, which could adversely affect and delay the development or commercialization of such product candidate.
Risks Related to Our Dependence On and Work with Third Parties
We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties, including independent clinical investigators and CROs, to conduct our preclinical studies and clinical trials. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or meet expected deadlines, we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or commercialize our product candidates, and our business could be substantially harmed.
We have relied upon and plan to continue to rely upon third parties, including independent clinical investigators and third-party CROs, to conduct monitor and manage data for our preclinical studies and clinical trials. We rely on these parties for execution of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and control only certain aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each of our studies and trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on these third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our third-party contractors and CROs are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the competent authorities of the member states of the EEA, the MHRA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and trial sites. If we or any of our CROs fail to comply with applicable GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA, the MHRA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that any of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with the product candidate produced under FDA’s
Table of Contents
current good manufacturing practice, or cGMP, regulations or similar foreign regulations. Our failure to comply with these regulations may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process.
Further, these principal investigators and CROs are not our employees and we will not be able to control, other than by contract, the amount of resources, including time, which they devote to our product candidates and clinical trials. If independent investigators or CROs fail to devote sufficient resources to the development of our product candidates, or if their performance is substandard, it may delay or compromise the prospects for approval and commercialization of any product candidates that we develop. In addition, the use of third-party service providers may require us to disclose our proprietary information to these parties, which could increase the risk that this information will be misappropriated.
Our CROs have the right to terminate their agreements with us in the event of an uncured material breach. In addition, some of our CROs have an ability to terminate their respective agreements with us if it can be reasonably demonstrated that the safety of the subjects participating in our clinical trials warrants such termination, if we make a general assignment for the benefit of our creditors or if we are liquidated.
If any of our relationships with these third-party CROs terminate, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. If CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations or meet expected deadlines, if they need to be replaced or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols, regulatory requirements or for other reasons, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for or successfully commercialize our product candidates. As a result, our results of operations and the commercial prospects for our product candidates would be harmed, our costs could increase and our ability to generate revenues could be delayed.
Switching or adding additional CROs involves additional cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can materially impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Additionally, CROs may lack the capacity to absorb higher workloads or take on additional capacity to support our needs. Though we carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter similar challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects.
We currently and in the future may depend on other third-party collaborators for the discovery, development and commercialization of ficerafusp alfa and any of our future product candidates. If our collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of these product candidates.
We have entered into collaborations with MSD International GmbH, or MSDIG, and MSD International Business GmbH, or MSDIB, and collectively with MSDIG, MSD and Biocon Ltd, or Biocon. In the future, we may form or seek other strategic alliances, joint ventures or collaborations, or enter into licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to product candidates we develop. Our current and potential future collaborations involving our product candidates may pose various risks to us, including:
• collaborators may have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations;
• collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our products or product candidates;
• collaborators may not properly enforce, maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatenedlitigation or that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information, exposing us to potential litigation or other intellectual property proceedings;
• collaborators may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability;
• disputes may arise between a collaborator and us that cause the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of the product candidate, or that result in costlylitigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources;
Table of Contents
• a collaborator with marketing and distribution rights to one or more of our product candidates that achieve regulatory approval may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of such products;
• if a present or future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program under such collaboration could be delayed, diminished or terminated;
• collaboration agreements may restrict our right to independently pursue new product candidates; and
• the mutual termination of the Contract Transfer and License Agreement with Biocon could delay the commercialization of ficerafusp alfa.
For future collaborations, if we enter into such collaboration agreements and strategic partnerships or license our intellectual property, products or businesses, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations, which could delay our timelines or otherwise adversely affect our business. We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or net income that justifies such transaction. Any of the factors set forth above, among others, could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates, which would harm our business prospects, financial condition and results of operations.
We currently have established collaborations and may seek to establish future collaborations, and, if we are not able to establish them on commercially reasonable terms, we may have to alter our development and commercialization plans.
The advancement of our product candidates and development programs and the potential commercialization of ficerafusp alfa and any of our future product candidates will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses. We currently collaborate with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies with respect to development and potential commercialization of ficerafusp alfa, and we may also do so with any future product candidates. These relationships may require us to incur non-recurring and other charges, increase our near- and long-term expenditures, issue securities that dilute our existing stockholders, or disrupt our management and business.
We face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming and complex. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for other collaborations will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the progress of our clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate.
Further, we may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for future product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view them as having the requisite potential to demonstrate safety and efficacy.
We may also be restricted under existing collaboration agreements from entering into future agreements on certain terms with potential collaborators. Such exclusivity could limit our ability to enter into strategic collaborations with future collaborators. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators.
We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of the product candidate for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any marketing or sales activities, or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which
Table of Contents
may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue.
We currently rely on third-party suppliers and other third parties for production of our product candidates and our dependence on these third parties may impair the advancement of our research and development programs and the development of our product candidates. Moreover, we intend to rely on third parties to produce commercial supplies of any approved product candidate 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 the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities following inspection of their facilities and procedures to manufacture our product candidates, fail to provide us with sufficient quantities of a product candidate or fail to do so at acceptable timing, quality levels or prices or fail to otherwise complete their duties in compliance with their obligations to us or other parties.
We rely on and expect to continue to rely on third-party CMOs for the supply of cGMP-grade clinical trial materials and commercial quantities of our product candidates and products, if approved. Reliance on third-party providers may expose us to more risk than if we were to manufacture product candidates ourselves. The facilities used by our CMOs to manufacture our product candidates must be approved by the FDA foreign regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit our BLA, to the FDA, or similar applications to foreign regulatory authorities. We have limited control over the manufacturing process of, and beyond contractual terms, we are completely dependent on our CMOs for compliance with cGMP, and applicable product tracking and tracing requirements, or similar foreign requirements for the manufacture of our product candidates. If our CMOs cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, or are unable to do so in a timely manner, they will not be able to secure and/or maintain regulatory approval for their manufacturing facilities or may result in delay of our ability to obtain marketing authorization, if any, of our product candidates. In addition, we have limited control over the ability of our CMOs to maintain adequate quality control, quality assurance and qualified personnel. If the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority does not approve these facilities for the manufacture of our product candidates or if it withdraws any such approval in the future, we may need to find alternative manufacturing facilities, which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved. In addition, any failure to achieve and maintain compliance with these laws, regulations and standards could subject us to the risk that we may have to suspend the manufacturing of our product candidates or that obtained approvals could be revoked, which would adversely affect our business and reputation. Furthermore, third-party providers may breach existing agreements they have with us because of factors beyond our control. They may also terminate or refuse to renew their agreement because of their own financial difficulties or business priorities, at a time that is costly or otherwise inconvenient for us. If we were unable to find an adequate replacement or another acceptable solution in time, our clinical trials could be delayed or our commercial activities could be harmed. In addition, the fact that we are dependent on our collaborators, our CMOs and other third parties for the manufacture, filling, storage and distribution of our product candidates means that we are subject to the risk that the products may have manufacturing defects that we have limited ability to prevent or control. The sale of products containing such defects could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
We rely on our CMOs to purchase from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials, and will rely on our existing and future collaborators to purchase from third-party suppliers the materials necessary to develop and produce our product candidates for future clinical trials and, upon approval, our products for commercialization. There are a limited number of suppliers for raw materials that we use to manufacture our product candidates and there may be a need to assess alternate suppliers to prevent a possible disruption of the manufacture of the materials necessary to produce our product candidates for our clinical trials, and if approved, ultimately for commercial sale. Apart from contractual measures, we do not have any control over the process or timing of the acquisition of these raw materials by our manufacturers or manufacturers paid by our collaborators. Moreover, we currently do not have any agreements for the commercial production of these raw materials. Although we generally do not begin a clinical trial unless we believe we have a sufficient supply of an product candidate to complete the clinical trial or have secured resupply capacity, any significant delay in the supply of an product candidate, or the raw material components thereof, for a planned or an ongoing clinical trial due to the need to replace a third-party manufacturer could considerably delay completion of our clinical trials, product testing and potential regulatory approval of our product candidates.
Table of Contents
In addition, the manufacturing of our product candidates is expensive and time-consuming, and generally requires more complex processes than those associated with small-molecule drugs. If we are successful in obtaining regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we might have limited quantities of such product candidates available to us in connection with a potential commercial launch, and these supplies may be further limited by our ongoing clinical development activities. If our manufacturers, collaborators or we are unable to purchase or produce sufficient quantities of raw materials or of our product candidates after regulatory approval has been obtained for our product candidates, the commercial launch of our product candidates could be delayed or there could be a shortage in supply, which in either case, would impair our ability to generate revenues from the sale of our product candidates.
We rely on our manufacturers and other subcontractors to comply with and respect the proprietary rights of others in conducting their contractual obligations for us. If our manufacturers or other subcontractors fail to acquire the proper licenses or otherwise infringe third party proprietary rights in the course of completing their contractual obligations to us, we may have to find alternative manufacturers or defendagainstclaims of infringement, either of which would significantly impact our ability to develop, obtain regulatory approval for or market our product candidates, if approved.
The operations of our suppliers, many of which are located outside of the United States, are subject to additional risks that are beyond our control and that could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We currently rely on and engage third-party manufacturers to provide all of the drug substance and the final drug product formulation of all of our product candidates that are being used in our clinical trials and preclinical studies. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture our product candidates, we primarily rely on WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited for the production of product necessary to complete our ongoing clinical trials. If an additional manufacturer became necessary in the future, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying another manufacturer. We currently do not have any long-term supply agreements in place, though we intend to enter into such agreements as well as evaluate additional product manufacturing sources in the future. As a result of our dependence on ex-U.S. suppliers, we are subject to risks associated with doing business abroad, including:
• geopolitical tensions, political unrest, terrorism, labor disputes and economic instability resulting in the disruption of trade from foreign countries in which our products are manufactured, particularly China;
• the imposition of new laws and regulations, including those relating to labor conditions, safety standards, information and data transfer, imports, duties, taxes, and other charges on imports, as well as trade restrictions and restrictions on currency exchange or the transfer of funds, particularly new or increased tariffs imposed on imports from countries where our suppliers operate, including China;
• greaterchallenges and increased costs with enforcing and periodically auditing or reviewing our suppliers’ and manufacturers’ compliance with cGMPs or status acceptable to the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities;
• reduced protection for intellectual property rights, including trade secret protection, in some countries, particularly China;
• disruptions in operations due to global, regional, or local epidemics, pandemics, public health crises or other emergencies or natural disasters;
• disruptions or delays in shipments; and
• changes in local economic conditions in countries where our manufacturers or suppliers are located.
Congress has previously considered legislation that would have the effect of restricting the ability of biopharmaceutical companies that enter into contracts with or receive funding from U.S. federal agencies from purchasing services or equipment from certain Chinese biotechnology companies. Draft versions of the National Defense Authorization Act of 2026 have included provisions that would have a similar effect. We do anticipate continued scrutiny on relationships with Chinese biotechnology companies, which could adversely impact our Chinese biotech business partners’ operations or financial position, which, in turn, could impact its and ability to supply us with product in the future. We may also face additional manufacturing and supply-chain risks due to the evolving regulatory and legal requirements in China, or due to the deterioration of the geo-political relationship between China and the U.S., including but not limited to potential sanctions imposed by the U.S. government on
Table of Contents
Chinese biotech partners, or other companies in China on whom we might rely, or any of the other countries in which our products are manufactured or marketed.
These and other factors beyond our control could interrupt our suppliers’ production, influence the ability of our suppliers to export our clinical supplies cost-effectively or at all and inhibit our supplier’s ability to procure certain materials, any of which could delay our clinical trials or otherwise harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
If any third-party manufacturer of our product candidates is unable to increase the scale of its production of our product candidates or increase the product yield of its manufacturing, then our manufacturing costs may increase and commercialization may be delayed.
In order to produce sufficient quantities to meet the demand for clinical trials and, if approved, subsequent commercialization of our product candidates, our third-party manufacturers will be required to increase their production and optimize their manufacturing processes while maintaining the quality of our product candidates. The transition to larger scale production could prove difficult. In addition, if our third-party manufacturers are not able to optimize their manufacturing processes to increase the product yield for our product candidates, or if they are unable to produce increased amounts of our product candidates while maintaining the same quality then we may not be able to meet the demands of clinical trials or market demands, which could decrease our ability to generate profits and have a material adverse impact on our business and results of operations.
We may need to maintain licenses for drug substances from third parties to develop and commercialize some of our product candidates, which could increase our development costs and delay our ability to commercialize those product candidates.
Should we decide to use any cell line and raw materials in any of our product candidates that are proprietary to one or more third parties, we would need to maintain licenses to those drug substances from those third parties. If we are unable to gain or continue to access rights to these drug substances prior to conducting preclinical toxicology studies intended to support clinical trials, we may need to develop alternate product candidates from these programs by either accessing or developing alternate drug substances, resulting in increased development costs and delays in commercialization of these product candidates. If we are unable to gain or maintain continued access rights to the desired drug substances on commercially reasonable terms or develop suitable alternate drug substances, we may not be able to commercialize product candidates from these programs.
Risks Related to Government Regulation
The regulatory approval processes of the FDA and comparable foreign authorities are lengthy, time-consuming and inherently unpredictable, and if we are ultimately unable to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, our business will be materially harmed.
The time required to obtain approval by the FDA and comparable foreign authorities is unpredictable but typically takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and depends upon numerous factors, including the substantial discretion of the regulatory authorities. In addition, approval policies, regulations or the type and amount of clinical data necessary to gain approval (or maintain approval) may change during the course of a product candidate’s clinical development and may vary among jurisdictions. For example, the Oncology Center of Excellence within the FDA has advanced Project Optimus, which is an initiative to reform the dose optimization and dose selection paradigm in oncology drug development to emphasize selection of an optimal dose, which is a dose or doses that maximizes not only the efficacy of a drug but the safety and tolerability as well. This shift from the prior approach, which generally determined the maximum tolerated dose, has required and will require us to continue to spend additional time and resources to further explore a product candidate’s dose-response relationship to facilitate optimum dose selection in a target population. Other recent Oncology Center of Excellence initiatives have included Project FrontRunner, a new initiative with a goal of developing a framework for identifying candidate drugs for initial clinical development in the earlier advanced setting rather than for treatment of patients who have received numerous prior lines of therapies or have exhausted available treatment options, and Project Confirm, which is an initiative to promote the transparency of outcomes related to accelerated approvals for oncology indications and provide a framework to foster discussion, research and innovation in approval and post-marketing
Table of Contents
processes, with the goal to enhance the balance. We are considering these and other policy changes as they relate to our programs.
We have not obtained regulatory approval for any product candidate. Neither we nor any future collaborator is permitted to market any biological product in the U.S. until we or the future collaborator receives regulatory approval of a BLA, from the FDA. It is possible that ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates will not obtain regulatory approval from the FDA, Health Canada, the European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates could fail to receive regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following:
• the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials;
• we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that a product candidate has an acceptable risk-benefit profile in the proposed indication;
• we may be unable to demonstrate to the satisfaction of the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities that the facility in which a product candidate is manufactured meets standards designed to assure that the product candidate continues to be safe, pure, and potent;
• the results of clinical trials may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval;
• we may be unable to demonstrate that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks;
• the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may disagree with our interpretation of data from clinical trials or preclinical studies;
• the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates may not be sufficient to support the submission of a BLA to the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or regulatory submissions to comparable regulatory authorities to obtain regulatory approval in such jurisdiction; and
• the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may find deficiencies with or fail to approve our manufacturing processes or facility or the manufacturing processes or facilities of third-party manufacturers with which we contract for clinical and commercial supplies.
This lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market any product candidate we develop, which would significantly harm our business, results of operations and prospects. The FDA and other comparable foreign authorities have substantial discretion in the approval process and in determining when or whether regulatory approval will be granted for any product candidate that we develop. Even if we believe the data collected from future clinical trials of our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or any other regulatory authority.
In addition, even if we were to obtain approval, the FDA may approve any of our product candidates for fewer or more limited indications, or a more limited patient population, than we request, may grant approval contingent on the performance of costly clinical trials or other post-marketing requirements, or may approve a product candidate with a label that does not include the labeling claims we believe are necessary or desirable for the successful commercialization of such product candidates. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates, we will be required to submit new or supplemental applications and obtain approval for certain changes to the approved product, product labeling, or manufacturing process and the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may refuse to approve such applications or supplements.
In addition, the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may change their policies, promulgate additional regulations, revise existing regulations or take other actions that may prevent or delay approval of our future products under development on a timely basis. Such policy or regulatory changes could impose additional requirements upon us that could delay our ability to obtain approvals, increase the costs of compliance or restrict our ability to maintain any marketing authorizations we may have obtained. Any of the foregoing scenarios could materially harm the commercial prospects for our product candidates.
Table of Contents
Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy personnel, and substantial leadership, personnel and policy changes or otherwise, could prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved, or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, which could negatively impact our business.
The ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the agency have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.
Without the appropriation of adequate funding to federal agencies, our business operations related to our product development activities for the U.S. market could be impacted. A prolonged government shutdown could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, the National Institutes of Health, or NIH, to conduct research or provide grants, or other agencies to slow their work, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations. In addition, the current administration is seeking to reduce the NIH budget for funding of medical research, which could decrease the ability of facilities that rely on NIH funding to enroll and conduct clinical trials or increase the costs to us of conducting clinical trials.
Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies, including substantial leadership, personnel, and policy changes, may also slow the time necessary for biological products or modifications to approved biological products to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. Changes and cuts in FDA staffing have been reported by some within the pharmaceutical industry as creating instances of delays in the FDA’s responsiveness or in its ability to review IND submissions or applications, issue regulations or guidance, or implement or enforce regulatory requirements in a timely fashion.
There is substantial uncertainty as to whether and how the current administration will continue to seek to modify or revise the requirements and policies of the FDA and other regulatory agencies with jurisdiction over our product candidates and any products for which we obtain approval. This uncertainty could present new challenges and/or opportunities as we navigate development and approval of our product candidates. Additionally, the current administration could continue to issue or promulgate executive orders, regulations, policies or guidance that adversely affect us or create a more challenging or costly environment to pursue the development of new therapeutic candidates.
We may be required to suspend, repeat or terminate our clinical trials if they are not conducted in accordance with regulatory requirements, the results are negative or inconclusive or the trials are not well designed.
Clinical trials must be conducted in accordance with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Clinical trials are subject to oversight by the FDA, other foreign governmental agencies and IRBs or ethical committees at the trial sites where the clinical trials are conducted. In addition, clinical trials must be conducted with product candidates manufactured in accordance with applicable cGMP. Clinical trials may be suspended by the FDA, other foreign regulatory authorities, us, or by an IRB or ethics committee with respect to a particular clinical trial site, for various reasons, including:
• deficiencies in the conduct of the clinical trials, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or trial protocols;
• deficiencies in the clinical trial operations or trial sites;
• unforeseenadverse side effects or the emergence of undue risks to trial subjects;
• deficiencies in the trial design necessary to demonstrate efficacy;
• ficerafusp alfa may not appear to offer benefits over current therapies; or
• the quality or stability of ficerafusp alfa may fall below acceptable standards.
Table of Contents
We intend to develop our product candidates in part in combination with other therapies and may develop our future product candidates in combination with other therapies, which exposes us to additional regulatory risks.
We intend to develop our product candidates in part in combination with other therapies, including ficerafusp alfa in combination with pembrolizumab as a treatment for HNSCC and SCAC, and may develop ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates in combination with one or more currently approved cancer therapies. These combinations have not been previously tested in the clinic and may, among other things, fail to demonstrate synergistic activity, may fail to achievesuperior outcomes relative to the use of single agents or other combination therapies, or may fail to demonstrate sufficient safety or efficacy traits in clinical trials to enable us to complete those clinical trials or obtain marketing approval for the combination therapy.
In addition, we did not develop or obtain regulatory approval for, and we do not manufacture or sell, any of these approved therapeutics. The other therapies we are using in combination may be removed from the market, or we may not be able to secure adequate quantities of such materials for which we have no guaranteed supply contract, and thus be unavailable for testing or commercial use with any of our approved products. The other therapies we may use in combination with our product candidates may also be supplanted in the market by newer, safer or more efficacious products or combinations of products.
Even if any product candidate we develop were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risk that the FDA, Health Canada, the European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with our product candidate or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially. Combination therapies are commonly used for the treatment of cancer diseases, and we would be subject to similar risks if we develop any of our product candidates for use in combination with other drugs or for indications other than cancer.
We may also evaluate ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell any product candidate we develop in combination with any such unapproved cancer therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval.
If the FDA, Health Canada, the European Commission or comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve these other biological products or revoke their approval of, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues arise with, the biological products we choose to evaluate in combination with any product candidate we develop, we may be unable to obtain approval of or market any such product candidate.
Even if we receive marketing approval of ficerafusp alfa, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense. If we fail to comply or experience unanticipatedproblems with our products, we may be subject to administrative and judicial enforcement, including monetary penalties, for non-compliance and our approved products, if any, could be deemed misbranded or adulterated and prohibited from continued distribution.
Any marketing approvals that we may receive for ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or the conditions of approval or contain requirements for potentially costly post-market testing and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. The FDA may also require implementation of a REMS as a condition of approval of any product candidate, which could include requirements for a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA, Health Canada, the EMA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority approves a product candidate, the manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, tracking and tracing event and deviation reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, import and export and record keeping for the product candidate will be subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with cGMP and GCP, for any clinical trials that we may conduct post-approval. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with any approved candidate, including adverse events of unanticipatedseverity or frequency, or with our
Table of Contents
or our third-party manufacturers’ manufacturing processes or facilities, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in, among other things:
• suspension of, or imposition of restrictions on, the marketing or manufacturing of the product, withdrawal of the product from the market, or product recalls;
• Warning letters or untitled letters, or holds on clinical trials;
• refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications we file, or suspension or revocation of approved biologics licenses;
• product seizure or detention, monetary penalties, refusal to permit the import or export of the product, or placement on Import Alert; and
• permanent injunctions and consent decrees including the imposition of civil or criminalpenalties.
Given the nature of biological products manufacturing, there is a risk of contamination. Any contamination could materially adversely affect our ability to produce product candidates on schedule and could, therefore, harm our results of operations and cause reputational damage. Some of the raw materials and other components required in our manufacturing process are derived from biologic sources. Such raw materials are difficult to procure and may be subject to contamination or recall. A material shortage, contamination, recall or restriction on the use of biologically derived substances in the manufacture of our product or product candidates could adversely impact or disrupt the commercial manufacturing or the production of clinical material, which could materially and adversely affect our development and commercialization timelines and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and could adversely affect our ability to meet our supply obligations.
Moreover, the FDA strictly regulates the promotional claims that may be made about drug and biological products. In particular, an approved product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA as reflected in the product’s approved labeling, or off-label uses. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. The FDA has issued guidance on the factors that it will consider in determining whether a firm’s product communication is consistent with the FDA-required labeling for that product, and those factors contain complexity and potential for overlap and misinterpretation. A company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses of their products may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties.
The FDA and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay marketing approval of a product. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the U.S. or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.
Any government investigation of allegedviolations of law could require us to expend significant time and resources in response and could generate negative publicity. Any failure to comply with ongoing regulatory requirements may significantly and adversely affect our ability to commercialize and generate revenue from our products. If regulatory sanctions are applied or if regulatory approval is withdrawn, the value of our company and our operating results will be adversely affected.
In addition, if we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability.
While we intend to seek designations for our potential product candidates with the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities that are intended to confer benefits such as a faster development process, there can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such designations. In addition, even if one or more of our potential product candidates are granted such designations, we may not be able to realize the intended benefits of such designations.
The FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities offer certain designations for product candidates that are designed to encourage the research and development of product candidates that are intended to address conditions with significant unmet medical need. These designations may confer benefits such as additional interaction with regulatory authorities and priority review.
Table of Contents
However, there can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such designations for any potential product candidates. In addition, while such designations could expedite the development or approval process, they generally do not change the standards for approval. Even if we obtain such designations for one or more of our potential product candidates, there can be no assurance that we will realize their intended benefits.
For example, we have received a breakthrough therapy designation for ficerafusp alfa in combination with pembrolizumab for the 1L treatment of patients with R/M HNSCC whose tumors express programmed death-ligand 1 with CPS ≥1, excluding HPV-positive oropharyngeal squamous cell carcinoma, and we may seek breakthrough therapy designation for ficerafusp alfa for additional uses or for some of our potential product candidates in the future. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a therapy that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other therapies, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the therapy may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For therapies 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. Therapies designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA may also be eligible for accelerated approval. Designation as a breakthrough therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe one of our potential 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 therapies considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if one or more of our potential product candidates qualify as breakthrough therapies, the FDA may later decide that such product candidates no longer meet the conditions for qualification.
In addition, we may seek fast-track designation for some of our potential product candidates. If a therapy is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and the therapy nonclinical or clinical data demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for this condition, the therapy sponsor may apply for fast-track designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, there can be no assurance that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive fast track designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures, and receiving a fast-track designation does not provide assurance of ultimate FDA approval. 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.
If the FDA determines that a product candidate offers a treatment for a serious condition and, if approved, the product would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness, the FDA may designate the product candidate for priority review. A priority review designation means that the goal for the FDA to review an application is six months, rather than the standard review period of ten months. We may request priority review for the product candidates that we may develop. The FDA has broad discretion with respect to whether or not to grant priority review status to a product candidate, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for such designation or status, the FDA may decide not to grant it. Moreover, a priority review designation does not necessarily result in an expedited regulatory review or approval process or necessarily confer any advantage with respect to approval compared to conventional FDA procedures. Receiving priority review from the FDA does not guarantee approval within the six-month review cycle or at all.
We may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug designations for our product candidates, and we may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with orphan drug designation, including the potential for market exclusivity.
Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and European Union, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. For example, the FDA may designate a product as an orphan product if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or a patient population of greater than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in
Table of Contents
the U.S. We may not be able to obtain orphan drug designation for any indications for our product candidates, and we may not be able to maintain such designations if granted.
Generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same biologic for the same approved use or indication within such rare disease or condition for seven years. Even if we are able to obtain orphan drug designation or orphan drug exclusivity, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same approved use or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug for the same approved use or condition if, among other things, the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior, if it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process. Even if we receive orphan drug designation or orphan drug exclusivity for any of our product candidates, there is no guarantee that we will enjoy the benefits of such designations or exclusivity periods.
While we may seek accelerated approval for some of our product candidates, we may not be able to obtain it as the sufficiency of our clinical trial results for accelerated approval are subject to the FDA’s discretion.
We plan to seek approval for ficerafusp alfa under the FDA’s accelerated approval pathway. A product may be eligible for accelerated approval if it is designed to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality, or IMM, that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit. For more information, see the section titled “ Business—Government Regulation—Accelerated Approval .”
Under FDORA, the FDA is empowered to take action, such as issuing fines, against companies that fail to conduct with due diligence any post-approval confirmatory study or submit timely reports to the agency on their progress. There can be no assurance that the FDA would allow any of the product candidates we may develop to proceed on an accelerated approval pathway, and even if the FDA did allow such pathway, there can be no assurance that such submission or application will be accepted or that any expedited development, review or approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. Moreover, even if we received accelerated approval, any post-approval studies required to confirm and verify clinical benefit may not show such benefit, which could lead to withdrawal of any approvals we have obtained. Receiving accelerated approval does not assure that the product’s accelerated approval will eventually be converted to a traditional approval.
Risks Related to Commercialization
The commercial success of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates will depend upon the degree of market acceptance of such product candidates by physicians, patients, healthcare payors and others in the medical community.
Ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates may not be commercially successful. Even if ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain market acceptance among physicians, patients, healthcare payors, or the medical community. The commercial success of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates will depend significantly on the broad adoption and use of the resulting product by these individuals and organizations for approved indications. The degree of market acceptance of our products will depend on a number of factors, including:
• demonstration of clinical efficacy and safety, including as compared to any more established products;
• the indications for which ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates are approved, if any;
• the limitation of our targeted patient population and other limitations or warnings contained in any FDA-approved labeling;
• acceptance of a new drug for the relevant indication by healthcare providers and their patients;
• the pricing and cost-effectiveness of our products, as well as the cost of treatment with our products in relation to alternative treatments and therapies;
Table of Contents
• our ability to obtain and maintain sufficient third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement from government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors;
• the willingness of patients to pay all, or a portion of, out-of-pocket costs associated with our products in the absence of sufficient third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement;
• any restrictions on the use of our products, and the prevalence and severity of any adverse effects;
• potential product liability claims;
• the timing of market introduction of our products as well as availability, safety and efficacy of competitive drugs;
• the effectiveness of our or any current or future collaborators’ sales and marketing strategies; and
• unfavorable publicity relating to the product.
If ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates is approved but does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, hospitals, healthcare payors or patients, we may not generate sufficient revenue from that product and may not become or remain profitable. Our efforts to educate the medical community and third-party payors regarding the benefits of our products may require significant resources and may never be successful.
The market opportunities for ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidate we develop, if approved, may prove to be smaller than we believe.
Any revenue we are able to generate in the future from product sales will be dependent, in part, upon the size of the market in the U.S. and any other jurisdiction for which we gain regulatory approval and have commercial rights. If the markets or patient subsets that we are targeting are not as significant as we estimate, we may not generate significant revenues from sales of such products, even if approved.
The number of patients who have the types of cancer we are targeting may turn out to be lower than expected. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates may be limited, if and when approved. Even if we obtain significant market share for any product candidate, if and when approved, if the potential target populations are small, we may never achieveprofitability without obtaining marketing approval for additional indications.
Further, cancer therapies are sometimes characterized as first-line, second-line or third-line, and the FDA often approves new therapies initially only for third-line use. When cancer is detected early enough, first-line therapy, usually chemotherapy, hormone therapy, surgery, radiation therapy or a combination of these, is sometimes adequate to cure the cancer or prolong life without a cure. Second- and third-line therapies are administered to patients when prior therapy is not effective. The number of patients who receive second- and third-line treatment is significantly smaller than the number of patients who receive first-line treatment, and the prognosis of patients who receive second- or third-line treatment is often poorer than that of patients who receive first-line treatment. There is no guarantee that any product candidate we develop, even if approved, would be approved for first-line therapy, and, prior to any such approvals, we may have to conduct additional clinical trials.
If approved, our product candidates that are regulated as biological products, or biologics, may face competition from biosimilars approved through an abbreviated regulatory pathway.
The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, established an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biologics with an FDA-licensed reference biologic product. Under the BPCIA, a reference biological product is granted 12 years of non-patent data exclusivity from the time of first licensure of the product, and the FDA will not accept an application for a biosimilar or interchangeable product based on the reference biological product until four years after the date of first licensure of the reference product. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still develop and receive approval of a competing biologic, so long as their BLA does not rely on the reference product or sponsor’s data and is not submitted as a biosimilar application. Certain changes and supplements to an approved BLA, and subsequent applications filed by the same sponsor, manufacturer, licensor, predecessor in interest, or other related entity do not qualify for the 12-year exclusivity period. The law is complex and any new policies or processes adopted by the FDA could have a material adverse effect on the future commercial prospects for our biological products.
Table of Contents
We believe that any of the product candidates we develop that is approved in the U.S. as a biological product under a BLA should qualify for the 12-year period of exclusivity. However, there is a risk that this exclusivity could be shortened due to congressional action or otherwise, or that the FDA will not consider the subject product candidate to be a reference product for competing products, potentially creating the opportunity for biosimilar competition sooner than anticipated. Moreover, the extent to which a biosimilar, once approved, will be substituted for any one of the reference products in a way that is similar to traditional generic substitution for non-biological products will depend on a number of marketplace and regulatory factors that are still developing. The approval of a biosimilar of our product candidates could have a material adverse impact on our business due to increased competition and pricing pressure. It is also possible that payors will give reimbursement preference to biosimilars over reference biological products, even absent a determination of interchangeability.
Laws and regulations outside the United States differ, including the length and extent of patent and exclusivity protection and pathways for competition to enter the market. Other countries may have significantly shorter or longer periods of exclusivity. In addition, other countries may have different standards in determining similarity to a reference product. Any market entry of competing products to our product candidates in these other regions could adversely affect our business in those regions.
To the extent that we do not receive any anticipated periods of regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates it could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Obtaining and maintaining marketing approval of ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining and maintaining marketing approval of ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates in other jurisdictions.
Obtaining and maintaining marketing approval of ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain marketing approval in any other jurisdiction, while a failure or delay in obtaining marketing approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the marketing approval process in others. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion of the product candidate in those countries. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the U.S., including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval.
We may also submit marketing applications in other countries. Regulatory authorities in jurisdictions outside of the United States have requirements for approval of product candidates with which we must comply prior to marketing in those jurisdictions. Obtaining foreign marketing approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed.
Table of Contents
We may enter into agreements with third parties to sell, distribute and/or market ficerafusp alfa, or any future product candidates, if we obtain regulatory approval, which may adversely affect our ability to generate revenues.
Given the development stage of ficerafusp alfa, we have no experience in sales, marketing and distribution of biotech products. However, if ficerafusp alfa, or any future product candidates that we may develop, obtains marketing approval, we might intend to develop sales and marketing capacity, either alone or with partners, or rely upon the sales and marketing capabilities of our partners. Outsourcing sales, distribution and marketing may subject us to a variety of risks, including:
• our inability to exercise direct control over sales, distribution and marketing activities and personnel;
• potential failure or inability of contracted sales personnel to successfully market our products to physicians; and
• potential disputes with third parties concerning distribution, sales and marketing expenses, calculation of royalties, and sales and marketing strategies.
If we are unable to partner with a third party that has adequate sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities, we may have difficulty commercializing ficerafusp alfa or any other product candidates which would adversely affect our business, financial condition, and ability to generate product revenues.
Off-label use or misuse of ficerafusp alfa may harm our reputation in the marketplace or result in injuries that lead to costly product liability suits.
If ficerafusp alfa is approved by the FDA, we may only promote or market ficerafusp alfa in a manner consistent with its FDA-approved labeling. We will train our marketing and sales forceagainst promoting ficerafusp alfa for uses outside of the approved indications for use, known as “off-label uses.” We cannot, however, prevent a physician from using ficerafusp alfa off-label, when in the physician’s independent professional medical judgment, he or she deems it appropriate. Furthermore, the use of ficerafusp alfa for indications other than those approved by the FDA may not effectively treat such conditions. Any such off-label use of ficerafusp alfa could harm our reputation in the marketplace among physicians and patients. There may also be increased risk of injury to patients if physicians attempt to use ficerafusp alfa for these uses for which they are not approved, which could lead to product liability suits that might require significant financial and management resources and that could harm our reputation.
We are subject to export and import controls, economic sanctions and anti-corruption laws and regulations of the United States and other jurisdictions. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations of these laws and regulations, which can harm our business.
We are subject to export control and import laws and regulations, including the U.S. Export Administration Regulations, U.S. Customs regulations, and various economic and trade sanctions regulations administered by the U.S. Treasury Department’s Office of Foreign Assets Control. Export controls and trade sanctions laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit altogether the provision, sale, or supply of our products to certain governments, persons, entities, countries, and territories, including those that are the target of comprehensive sanctions or an embargo. We are also subject to anti-corruption and anti-bribery laws, including the U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act of 1977, or FCPA, as amended, the U.S. domestic bribery statute contained in 18 U.S.C. § 201, the U.S. Travel Act, and other state and national anti-bribery laws in the countries in which we conduct activities. Anti-corruption laws are interpreted broadly and prohibit companies and their employees, agents, contractors, and other partners from authorizing, promising, offering, or providing, directly or indirectly, improper payments or anything else of value to recipients in the public or private sector. The FCPA also requires public companies to make and keep books and records that accurately and fairly reflect the transactions of the corporation and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our employees, agents, contractors, and other partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have actual knowledge of such activities. Any violation of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminalfines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraudlitigation, reputational harm, and other consequences.
Table of Contents
If we or any third-party manufacturer we engage now or in the future fail to comply with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs or liabilities that could have a material adverse effect on our business.
We and third-party manufacturers we engage now are, and any third-party manufacturer we may engage in the future will be, subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and waste. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources. We also could incur significant costs associated with civil or criminalfines and penalties.
Although we maintain general liability insurance as well as workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities.
In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations may impair our research, development or commercialization efforts. Failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions.
Further, with respect to the operations of our current and any future third-party contract manufacturers, it is possible that if they fail to operate in compliance with applicable environmental, health and safety laws and regulations or properly dispose of wastes associated with our products, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, suffer reputational harm or experience a disruption in the manufacture and supply of ficerafusp alfa or products. In addition, our supply chain may be adversely impacted if any of our third-party contract manufacturers become subject to injunctions or other sanctions as a result of their non-compliance with environmental, health and safety laws and regulations.
Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property
Our ability to compete may decline if we do not adequately protect our proprietary rights.
Our commercial success depends, in part, on obtaining and maintaining patents and other forms of intellectual property rights for ficerafusp alfa, including ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates, methods used to produce, purify, and manufacture those product candidates, and methods of utilizing the product candidates, including methods for treating patients, among other aspects of ficerafusp alfa or on licensing-in such rights. Failure to protect or to obtain, maintain, or extend adequate patent and other intellectual property rights could materially adversely affect our ability to develop and market ficerafusp alfa.
Our strategy depends in part on our ability to identify and seek patent protection for our discoveries. The patent prosecution process is time-consuming and expensive, and we and our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner in all jurisdictions where protection may be commercially advantageous. It is also possible that we or our current or future licensors, licensees, or collaborators will fail to identify patentable aspects of inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before it is too late to obtain patent protection on them.
The standards which the United States Patent and Trademark Office, or USPTO, and its foreign counterparts use to grant patents are not always applied predictably or uniformly and can change in the future. There is also no uniform, worldwide policy regarding the subject matter and scope of claims granted or allowable. The laws of some foreign countries do not protect proprietary information to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Outside the United States, patent protection must be sought in individual jurisdictions, further adding to the cost and uncertainty of obtaining adequate patent protection outside of the United States. Accordingly, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability, and commercial value of our and our current or future licensors’, licensees’ or collaborators’ current
Table of Contents
and future patent rights are highly uncertain. We cannot predict whether additional patents protecting ficerafusp alfa will issue in the U.S. or in foreign jurisdictions, or whether any patents that do issue will have claims of adequate scope to provide competitive advantage. Our and our current or future licensors’, licensees’ or collaborators’ pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect ficerafusp alfa or other technology, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive products and technology. The patent examination process may require us or our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators to narrow the scope of the claims of our or our current or future licensors’, licensees’ or collaborators’ pending and future patent applications, which may limit the scope of patent protection that may be obtained.
We cannot assure you that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found. If such prior art exists, it can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do successfully issue, or have issued and even if such patents cover a product candidate, and/or other technologies, third parties may initiate opposition, interference, re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, litigation, nullification or derivation action in court or before patent offices, or similar proceedings challenging the validity, enforceability, scope, inventorship, or ownership of such patents, which may result in the patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, held unenforceable, or unavailable to us. Our and our current and future licensors’, licensees’ or collaborators’ patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issue from such application(s), and then only to the extent the issued claims cover the technology in the relevant jurisdiction.
Patent applications in the U.S. and many foreign jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all, and because publications of discoveries in scientific literature lag behind actual discoveries. As such, we cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to make the inventions claimed in our issued patents or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for protection of the inventions set forth in our patents or patent applications. As a result, we may not be able to obtain or maintain protection for certain inventions. Therefore, the enforceability and scope of our patents in the U.S. and in foreign countries cannot be predicted with certainty and, as a result, any patents that we own or license may not provide sufficient protection against competitors. We may not be able to obtain or maintain patent protection from our pending patent applications, from those we may file in the future, or from those we may license from third parties. Moreover, even if we are able to obtain patent protection, such patent protection may be of insufficient scope to achieve our business objectives.
In addition, changes in, or different interpretations of, patent laws in the U.S. and other countries may permit others to use our discoveries or to develop and commercialize ficerafusp alfa without providing any notice or compensation to us or may limit the scope of patent protection that we or our licensors are able to obtain. The laws of some countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as U.S. laws and those countries may lack adequate rules and procedures for defending our intellectual property rights.
We will not seek to protect our intellectual property rights in all jurisdictions throughout the world and we may not be able to adequately enforce our intellectual property rights even in the jurisdictions where we seek protection.
Filing, prosecuting and defending patents on ficerafusp alfa in all countries and jurisdictions throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the U.S. could be less extensive than those in the U.S., assuming that rights are obtained in the U.S. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the U.S. As such, we will not file for patent protection in all national and regional jurisdictions in the world where such protection may be available.
Accordingly, competitors may use our and our existing or future licensors’, licensees’ or collaborators’ technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we and our existing or future licensors, licensees or collaborators have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the U.S. These products may compete with ficerafusp alfa or other technologies, and our and our existing or future licensors’, licensees’ or collaborators’ patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Table of Contents
The laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Patent protection must be sought on a country-by-country basis, which is an expensive and time-consuming process with uncertain outcomes. Accordingly, we may choose not to seek patent protection in certain countries, and we will not have the benefit of patent protection in such countries. In addition, the legal systems of some countries, particularly developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, and the requirements for patentability differ, in varying degrees, from country to country, and the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights, including trade secrets, to the same extent as federal and state laws of the United States. As a result, many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. Such issues may make it difficult for us to stop the infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our intellectual property rights. For example, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against third parties, including government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, patents may provide limited or no benefit. In those countries, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we own or license. Similarly, if our trade secrets are disclosed in a foreign jurisdiction, competitors worldwide could have access to our proprietary information and we may be without satisfactory recourse. Such disclosure could have a material adverse effect on our business. Moreover, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in foreign intellectual property laws.
Furthermore, proceedings to enforce our patent rights and other intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claimsagainst us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded to us, if any, may not be commercially meaningful, while the damages and other remedies we may be ordered to pay such third parties may be significant. 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.
Issued patents covering ficerafusp alfa and related technology could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court or before a patent office. We are currently, and may in the future become, involved in lawsuits involving our intellectual property, including patents, to protect or enforce our patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful.
Issued patents may be challenged, narrowed, invalidated, circumvented, or otherwise encumbered by a third party. We may from time to time need to resort or become a party to litigation (or other adversarial proceeding) to enforce or defend any patents or other intellectual property rights owned by or licensed to us, or to determine or challenge the scope or validity of patents or other intellectual property rights of third parties in the U.S. and in other jurisdictions. For example, in October 2024, a complaint was filed in federal court, which among other things, alleges a claim for correction of inventorship of a number of patents, including patents alleged to be licensed to us relating to ficerafusp alfa. For more information on this pending litigation, see the section titled “ Legal Proceedings .” As enforcement of intellectual property rights is difficult, unpredictable and expensive, we may fail in enforcing our rights—in which case our competitors may be permitted to use our product without being enjoined, required to pay us any license fees, or compensate us for lost profits or reasonable royalty. In addition, litigation involving our patents carries the risk that one or more of our patents will be held invalid (in whole or in part, on a claim-by-claim basis) or held unenforceable. Such an adverse court ruling could allow third parties to commercialize technology covered by our patents we seek to enforce, such as those covering ficerafusp alfa and related methods, among other technologies, and then compete directly with us, without payment to us.
If we were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering ficerafusp alfa or other technology, the defendant could counterclaim that our patent is invalid and/or unenforceable, which is commonplace in patent litigation in the U.S. and other foreign jurisdictions. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an allegedfailure to meet any of several statutory requirements for patentability, for example, lack of utility, novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or lack of written description or as constituting unpatentable subject matter. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone substantively involved in prosecution of the
Table of Contents
patent withheld but-for material information from the USPTO or engaged in affirmatively egregiousmisconduct, during prosecution, with a specific intent to deceive the USPTO. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability during patent litigation is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we could lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on ficerafusp alfa or other technology. Such a loss of patent protection could have a material adverse impact on our business. Even if we have valid and enforceable patents, these patents still may not provide protection against competing products or processes sufficient to achieve our business objectives. Patents and other intellectual property rights also will not protect ficerafusp alfa if competitors design around our protected technology without infringing our patents or other intellectual property rights.
Even if such litigation (or other adversarial proceedings or disputes) is resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, this could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings and the legal costs associated with them, could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce our resources available for development activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace.
If we are unsuccessful in defendingagainst any claims by competitors or others that we are infringing upon their intellectual property rights, our business could be materially harmed.
Our commercial success will depend, in part, on our ability to operate without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. Other entities may have or obtain patents or other proprietary rights that could limit our ability to make, use, sell, offer for sale or import a product candidate, a future approved product, or impair our competitive position. We are aware of third party issued patents and/or pending patent applications, including in the U.S., that could be alleged as covering ficerafusp alfa, irrespective of the merits of any such allegation, for example in August 2024, we received a letter alleging ficerafusp alfa infringes certain third party patents. For example, in October 2024, a complaint was filed in federal court, which among other things, alleges a claim for correction of inventorship of a number of patents, including patents alleged to be licensed to us relating to ficerafusp alfa. Although we believe that these patents are not infringed, and/or are invalid and/or unenforceable, if a court should find that they cover a product candidate and we are unable to invalidate such patents, or if licenses for them are not available on commercially reasonable terms, our business could be harmed, perhaps materially.
We believe that if such patents or patent applications were asserted against us, we would have counterclaims and defenses against such claims, including non-infringement, the affirmative defense of safe harbor designed to protect activity undertaken to obtain federal regulatory approval of a drug, including under 35 U.S.C. § 271(e) and similar foreign exceptions to infringement, and defenses concerning patent invalidity and/or unenforceability. However, if such counterclaims and defenses were not successful and such patents were successfully asserted against us such that they are found to be valid and enforceable, and infringed, unless we obtain a license to such patents, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, we could be prevented from continuing to develop or commercialize ficerafusp alfa. We could also be required to pay substantial damages. We cannot assure you that we will ultimately prevail if any of this third-party intellectual property is asserted against us.
Table of Contents
In the biotechnology industry, significant litigation and other proceedings regarding patents, patent applications, trademarks and other intellectual property rights have become commonplace. The types of situations in which we may become a party to such litigation or proceedings include:
• we or our collaborators may initiate litigation or other proceedings against third parties seeking to invalidate the patents held by those third parties or to obtain a judgment that our products or processes do not infringe those third parties’ patents;
• if our competitors file patent applications that claim technology also claimed by us or our licensors, we or our licensors may be required to participate in interference, opposition or other proceedings to determine the priority of invention, which could jeopardize our patent rights and potentially provide a third party with a dominant patent position;
• if third parties initiate litigationclaiming that our processes or products infringe their patent or other intellectual property rights, we and our collaborators will need to defendagainst such proceedings; and
• if a license to necessary technology is terminated, the licensor may initiate litigationclaiming that our processes or products infringe or misappropriate their patent or other intellectual property rights and/or that we breached our obligations under the license agreement, and we and our collaborators would need to defendagainst such proceedings.
These lawsuits (or other proceedings) would be costly and could affect our results of operations and divert the attention of our management and scientific personnel. The cost of any patent litigation or other proceeding, even if resolved in our favor, could be substantial. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the cost of such litigation and proceedings more effectively than we can because of their substantially greater resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace. Patent litigation and other proceedings may also absorb significant management time.
In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our or our present or future licensors’, collaborators’ or partners’ patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates. 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.
Third party intellectual property right holders, including our competitors, may actively bring infringementclaimsagainst us. We may not be able to successfully settle, license on commercially acceptable terms or otherwise resolve such potential infringementclaims. If we are unable to successfully settle future claims on terms acceptable to us, we may be required to engage or continue costly, unpredictable and time-consuming litigation and may be prevented from or experience substantial delays in marketing any approved products. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to potentially pay damages, we or our licensees may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing our product candidates that are held to be infringing or be forced to redesign our product candidates so that we no longer infringe the third-party intellectual property rights. Any of these events, even if we were ultimately to prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business.
The biotechnology industry has produced a significant number of patents, and it may not always be clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of products or methods of use. The coverage of patents is subject to interpretation by the courts, and the interpretation is not always uniform or predictable. If we are sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our products or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity is difficult. For example, in the U.S., proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and divert management’s time and attention in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on us. If we are unable to avoid infringing the patent rights of others, we may be required to seek a license, defend an infringement action or challenge the validity of the patents in court. Patent litigation is costly and time consuming. We may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. In addition, if we do not obtain a license, develop or obtain non-infringing technology, fail to defend an infringement action successfully or have infringed patents declared invalid, we may incur
Table of Contents
substantial monetary damages, encounter significant delays in bringing ficerafusp alfa to market and be precluded from manufacturing or selling ficerafusp alfa.
We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products.
It is also possible that in our evaluation of third-party intellectual property, we failed to identify relevant patents or applications. We cannot guarantee that any of our patent searches or analyses, including but not limited to the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third party patent and pending application in the U.S. and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of ficerafusp alfa in any jurisdiction.
The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our products. We may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the U.S. or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market ficerafusp alfa. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our products.
For example, U.S. applications filed before November 29, 2000 and certain U.S. applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the United States remain confidential until patents issue. Patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Furthermore, we operate in a highly competitive field, and given our limited resources, it is unreasonable to monitor all patent applications purporting to claim broad coverage in the areas in which we are active. Additionally, pending patent applications which have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover ficerafusp alfa or related technology. We cannot predict whether third parties will be able to successfully obtain claims or the breadth of such claims.
If we fail to comply with our obligations under our intellectual property licenses with third parties, we could lose license rights that are important to our business.
We are currently party to intellectual property license agreements. These license agreements impose, and we expect that future license agreements may impose, various obligations on us. For example, we have entered into patent and know-how license agreements that grant us the right to use certain technologies related to our clinical product candidate and related methods. If we fail to comply with our obligations under the licenses, the licensors may have the right to terminate their respective license agreements, in which event we might not be able to market any product that is covered by the agreements. Termination of the license agreements or reduction or elimination of our licensed rights may result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated licenses with less favorable terms, which could adversely affect our competitive business position and harm our business.
We may be unsuccessful in licensing or acquiring third-party intellectual property that may be required to develop and commercialize ficerafusp alfa.
We have rights, through patents that we have in-licensed or own, to the intellectual property to develop ficerafusp alfa. Because our programs may involve additional product candidates, that may require the use of intellectual property or proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license or use such intellectual property and proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any third-party intellectual property or proprietary rights or to do so on commercially reasonable terms. For example, we sometimes collaborate with public or private academic institutions to accelerate our research or development under written agreements with these institutions. Typically, these institutions provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the strategic collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified time frame or under terms that are acceptable to us, and the institution may license such intellectual property rights to third parties, potentially
Table of Contents
blocking our ability to pursue our development and commercialization plans. The same situation may occur with a present or future development partner.
The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property and proprietary rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies are also pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property and proprietary rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size and greater capital resources and development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license intellectual property and proprietary rights to us.
If we are unable to successfully acquire or in-license rights to required third-party intellectual property and proprietary rights or maintain our intellectual property and proprietary rights, we may have to cease development of the relevant the relevant program, product or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements.
The USPTO and various foreign patent offices require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent prosecution and post grant or issuance. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply. Additionally, periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or patent applications will be due to the USPTO and various foreign patent offices at various points over the lifetime of our patents and/or patent applications. We rely on our outside counsel or our agents to pay these fees when due. In many cases, an inadvertentlapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with rules applicable to the particular jurisdiction. However, there are situations in which noncompliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. If such an event were to occur, it could have a material adverse effect on our business. In addition, we may be responsible for the payment of patent fees for patent rights that we license from third parties. If any licensor of these patents does not itself elect to make these payments, and we fail to do so, we may be liable to the licensor for any costs and consequences of any resulting loss of patent rights. If we or our existing or future licensors fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering ficerafusp alfa, our competitors might be able to enter the market, which would have an adverse effect on our business.
If we do not obtain protection under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments and similar foreign legislation for extending the term of patents covering ficerafusp alfa, our business may be materially harmed.
Patents typically have a limited lifespan. In the U.S., if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date, not including potential patent term extensions or adjustments that may be available in the U.S., and under comparable laws applicable outside the U.S., where certain conditions are met. Various extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering ficerafusp alfa are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product candidate, we may be open to competition from competitive medications, including biosimilar medications. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products similar or identical to ours, causing our revenue from applicable products to be reduced, possibly materially, and potentially harming our ability to recover our investment in such product or obtain a reasonable return on that investment.
Depending upon the timing, duration, and conditions of FDA marketing approval of ficerafusp alfa, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for
Table of Contents
effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for that product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced, possibly materially.
We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that our employees or we have misappropriated their intellectual property, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property.
As is common in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, we employ individuals who were previously or concurrently employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, universities, and/or research institutions and the like, including our competitors or potential competitors. We may be subject to claims that these employees, or we, have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed trade secrets or other proprietary information of their former employers, or that patents and applications we have filed to protect inventions of these employees, even those related to ficerafusp alfa, are rightfully owned by their former or concurrent employer.
Litigation may be necessary to defendagainst these claims. Even if we are successful in defendingagainst these claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may losevaluable intellectual property rights or personnel or sustain damages. Such intellectual property rights could be awarded to a third party, and we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to commercialize ficerafusp alfa. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all.
We may be subject to claimschallenging the inventorship of our patents and other intellectual property.
We or our licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets, or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. For example, we or our licensors may have inventorship disputes arising from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defendagainst these and other claimschallenging inventorship or our or our licensors’ ownership of our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we or our licensors fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may losevaluable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our product candidates. Even if we are successful in defendingagainst such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
Risks Related to Healthcare, Insurance and Legal Matters
Product liability lawsuits against us could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and to limit commercialization of ficerafusp alfa.
We face an inherent risk of product liability exposure related to the testing of ficerafusp alfa in human trials and may face greater risk if we commercialize any products that we develop. Product liability claims may be brought against us by subjects enrolled in our trials, patients, healthcare providers or others using, administering or selling our products. If we cannot successfullydefend ourselves against such claims, we could incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in:
• decreased demand for any product candidate we may develop;
• withdrawal of trial participants;
• termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs;
• injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention;
• initiation of investigations by regulators;
• significant time and costs to defend the related litigation;
• substantial monetary awards to trial subjects or patients;
Table of Contents
• diversion of management and scientific resources from our business operations; and
• the inability to commercialize any product candidates that we may develop.
While we currently hold trial liability insurance coverage consistent with industry standards, the amount of coverage may not adequately cover all liabilities that we may incur. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. We intend to expand our insurance coverage for products to include the sale of commercial products if we obtain marketing approval for ficerafusp alfa, but we may be unable to obtain commercially reasonable product liability insurance. A successful product liability claim or series of claims brought against us, particularly if judgments exceed our insurance coverage, could decrease our cash and adversely affect our business and financial condition.
The successful commercialization of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish coverage, adequate reimbursement levels and favorable pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue.
The availability of coverage and the adequacy of reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs including but not limited to Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford prescription medications such as ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates, if approved. Our ability to achieve coverage and acceptable levels of reimbursement for our products by third-party payors will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize those products. Accordingly, we will need to successfully implement a coverage and reimbursement strategy for any approved product candidate. Even if we obtain coverage for a given product by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. For more information, see the section titled “Business—Government Regulation—Pharmaceutical Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement.”
If we participate in the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program or other governmental pricing programs, in certain circumstances, our products would be subject to ceiling prices set by such programs, which could reduce the revenue we may generate from any such products. Participation in such programs would also expose us to the risk of significant civil monetary penalties, sanctions and fines should we be found to be in violation of any applicable obligations thereunder.
Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for biopharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs when an equivalent generic drug or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our products as substitutable and offer to reimburse patients only for the less expensive product. Even if we are successful in demonstrating improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our products, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our products. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop.
There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the U.S., third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs will be covered. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates.
Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time-consuming, costly and uncertain. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs. However, no uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the U.S. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can
Table of Contents
differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, and, in some cases, at short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely. For products administered under the supervision of a physician (including products administered in the clinical setting), obtaining coverage and adequate reimbursement may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with such drugs. Additionally, separate reimbursement for the product itself or the administration of the product, or the treatment or procedure in which the product is used, may not be available, which may impact physician utilization.
Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates, if approved in these jurisdictions. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our products. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits.
Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and other third-party payors in the U.S. and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our products due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, and prescription drugs, surgical procedures and other treatments in particular, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products.
A primary trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Government authorities and third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular medications. Government authorities currently impose mandatory discounts for certain patient groups, such as Medicare and Medicaid beneficiaries, and may seek to increase such discounts at any time. Future regulation may negatively impact the price of our products, if approved. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the U.S. or abroad. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision to overturn established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, our product candidate may lose any marketing approval that may have been obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability, which would adversely affect our business.
We are subject to various U.S. federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations, which could increase compliance costs, and our failure to comply with these laws and regulations could harm our reputation, subject us to significant fines and liability or otherwise adversely affect our business.
Our business operations and current and future arrangements with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors, patient organizations and customers may expose us to broadly applicable foreign, federal and state fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we conduct our operations, including how we research, and plan to market, sell and distribute any products for which we obtain regulatory approval. For more information, see the section titled “Business—Government Regulation—Other U.S. Healthcare Laws.”
Table of Contents
Efforts to ensure that our current and future business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve ongoing substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices may not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. Due to the breadth of these laws, the narrowness of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, and the range of interpretations to which they are subject, it is possible that some of our current or future practices might be challenged under one or more of these laws. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government-funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. Defendingagainst any such actions can be costly and time-consuming and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defendingagainst any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired. Further, if any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business are found to be noncompliant with applicable laws or regulations, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government-funded healthcare programs. We plan to implement a corporate compliance program designed to identify, prevent and mitigate risk through the implementation of policies and procedures, training, and auditing and monitoring. We expect to devote resources to implement, maintain, administer and expand the compliance program as necessary. We cannot be certain, however, that our compliance program will ensure compliance with the various complex laws and regulations to which we are subject now or in the future.
Current and future healthcare reform legislation or regulation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain coverage for and commercialize ficerafusp alfa, if approved, or any future product candidates and may adversely affect the prices we may set.
In the U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and we expect there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system, including cost-containment measures that may reduce or limit coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs and biologics and affect our ability to profitably sell ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In particular, there have been and continue to be a number of initiatives at the U.S. federal and state levels that seek to reduce healthcare costs and improve the quality of healthcare. For example, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or the IRA, includes several provisions that will impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D pricing for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition, among others. Our lead candidate ficerafusp alfa is being developed in indications that may rely heavily on Medicare reimbursement. Accordingly, these price-negotiation provisions may have a negative impact on our future revenue and profits. The IRA also exempts orphan drugs from price negotiation if they have received only one orphan designation and are approved solely for that rare disease. However, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act of 2025, or the OBBBA, revised this exemption: now, all orphan drugs—regardless of the number of orphan designations—are exempt from the price negotiation program, so long as the drug’s approved indications are exclusively for the designated rare disease(s). While this revision may broaden the exemption for certain products, its effect on our future pipeline remains uncertain. Further, the IRA also imposed rebates with respect to certain drugs and biologics covered under Medicare Part B or Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation. For more information, see the section titled “Business—Government Regulation—Current and Future U.S. Healthcare Reform Legislation.”
Legally mandated price controls on payment amounts by third-party payors or other restrictions could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs. This could reduce the ultimate demand for ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates, if approved, or put pressure on our product pricing, which could negatively affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.
We expect that these existing laws and other federal and state healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, more rigorous coverage criteria, new payment methodologies and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product. Reductions in reimbursement levels may negatively impact the prices we receive or the frequency with
Table of Contents
which our potential products are prescribed or administered. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attainprofitability or commercialize ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates, if approved.
Failure to comply with laws and regulations related to the protection of research subjects could result in fines, penalties, and litigation, and have a material adverse effect upon our business.
We may be subject to regulation under international, federal, state, and local laws and regulations relating to the protection of research subjects. Federally funded human-subject research in the U.S., including the collection of identifiable human biospecimens, is governed by 45 CFR Part 46, also known as the Health and Human Services Policy for Protection of Human Research Subjects or the “Common Rule.” Use of biospecimens in certain other research is subject to FDA regulations for the Protection of Human Subjects and Institutional Review Boards at 21 CFR Parts 50 and 56. Research funded by the NIH, may be subject to grant or contract requirements, as well as NIH Certificates of Confidentiality. When collecting specimens for research in the U.S., our company and its collection sites are responsible for ensuring that specimens are collected in accordance with these regulations. In addition, other countries have their own regulations around the ethical collection of human specimens for research. While we believe that we are in compliance with these laws, we may not be aware of all such laws or may fail to properly audit and identify gaps in compliance. Similarly, we may find errors in our product candidates and processes and may fail to properly match the compliance requirements of our researchers to the compliance requirements of our suppliers. Failure of our company or our suppliers to comply with international, federal, state, and local laws and regulations could subject us to denial of the right to conduct business, fines, criminalpenalties, and/or other enforcement actions which could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Risks Related to Manufacturing of Our Product Candidates
Changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing may result in additional costs or delay.
As product candidates proceed through preclinical studies to late-stage clinical trials towards potential approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize processes. In addition, we may need a different CMO for manufacturing ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates for commercial supply needs. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of planned clinical trials or other future clinical trials conducted with the materials manufactured using altered processes. Such changes may also require additional testing, FDA notification or FDA approval. This could delay completion of clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of ficerafusp alfa and jeopardize our ability to commence sales and generate revenue.
We are subject to various manufacturing risks, any of which could substantially increase our costs and limit supply of ficerafusp alfa.
The process of manufacturing product therapeutics and bispecifics, including ficerafusp alfa, is complex, time-consuming, highly regulated and subject to several risks, including:
• product loss during the manufacturing process, including loss caused by contamination, equipment failure or improper installation or operation of equipment, or operator error. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in our products or in the manufacturing facilities in which our products are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination; the manufacturing facilities in which our products are made could be adversely affected by equipment failures, labor and raw material shortages, natural disasters, power failures and numerous other factors; and
• any adverse developments affecting manufacturing operations for our products may result in shipment delays, inventory shortages, lot failures, product withdrawals or recalls, or other interruptions in the supply of our products. We may also have to take inventory write-offs and incur other charges and expenses for products that fail to meet specifications, undertake costly remediation efforts or seek more costly manufacturing alternatives.
Table of Contents
Scaling up a biopharmaceutical manufacturing process is a difficult and uncertain task and involves additional risks, including cost overruns, process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, compliance with cGMPs, lot consistency and timely availability of sufficient quantity of raw materials. Even if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, manufacturers may not be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product or to meet potential future demand.
We may also make changes to our manufacturing processes at various points during development, for a number of reasons, such as controlling costs, achieving scale, decreasing processing time, increasing manufacturing success rate or other reasons. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve their intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause ficerafusp alfa to perform differently and affect the results of our ongoing or future clinical trials. In some circumstances, changes in the manufacturing process may require us to perform ex vivo comparability studies and to collect additional data from patients prior to undertaking more advanced clinical trials. For instance, changes in our process during the course of clinical development may require us to show the comparability of the product used in earlier clinical phases or at earlier portions of a trial to the product used in later clinical phases or later portions of the trial.
Risks Related to Employee Matters and Managing Growth
Our ability to develop product candidates, leverage our potential and our future growth depends on attracting, hiring and retaining our key personnel and recruiting additional qualified personnel. If we are not successful in attracting, motivating and retaining highly qualified personnel, we may not be able to successfully implement our business strategy. Additionally, we will need to grow the size of our organization, and we may experience difficulties in managing this growth.
We are highly dependent on members of our executive team. The loss of the services of any of them may adversely impact the achievement of our objectives. The loss of services of any of these individuals could delay or prevent the successful development of ficerafusp alfa, completion of our planned clinical trials or the commercialization of ficerafusp alfa.
Our success also depends upon the continued contributions of our key management and scientific personnel, many of whom have been instrumental for us and have substantial experience with developing therapies, identifying potential product candidates and building the technologies related to the clinical development of our product candidates. Given the specialized nature of dual-action biologics and our approach, there is an inherent scarcity of experienced personnel in these fields. As we continue developing our product candidates in our pipeline, we will require personnel with medical, scientific, or technical qualifications specific to each program. The loss of key personnel, in particular our scientists, would delay our research and development activities. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our team may terminate their employment with us on short notice. The competition for qualified personnel in the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries is intense, and our future success depends upon our ability to attract, retain, and motivate highly skilled scientific, technical and managerial employees. We face competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions, and other organizations. If we hire employees from competitors or other companies, their former employers may attempt to assert that these employees or we have breached legal obligations, resulting in a diversion of our time and resources and, potentially, damages. In addition, job candidates and existing employees often consider the value of the stock awards they receive in connection with their employment. If the perceived benefits of our stock awards decline, it may harm our ability to recruit and retain highly skilled employees. If our recruitment and retention efforts are unsuccessful in the future, it may be difficult for us to implement our business strategy, which would have a material adverse effect on our business.
As our development plans and strategies develop, and as we continue operating as a public company, we expect to need additional managerial, operational, marketing, sales, financial and other personnel. Future growth would impose significant added responsibilities on members of management, including:
Table of Contents
• managing our internal development efforts effectively, including the clinical and FDA review process for ficerafusp alfa and any other future product candidates we develop, while complying with our contractual obligations to contractors and other third parties; and
• improving our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures.
Our future financial performance and our ability to advance development of and, if approved, commercialize ficerafusp alfa and any future product candidates we develop, will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may have to divert a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities in order to devote a substantial amount of time to managing these growth activities.
We currently rely, and for the foreseeable future will continue to rely, in substantial part, on certain independent organizations, advisors and consultants to provide certain services. We cannot assure you that the services of independent organizations, advisors and consultants will continue to be available to us on a timely basis when needed, or that we can find qualified replacements. In addition, if we are unable to effectively manage our outsourced activities or if the quality or accuracy of the services provided by consultants is compromised for any reason, our clinical trials may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain marketing approval of ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates or otherwise advance our business. We cannot assure you that we will be able to manage our existing consultants or find other competent outside contractors and consultants on economically reasonable terms, or at all.
If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates we develop and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals.
Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock
The price of our stock may be volatile, and you could lose all or part of your investment.
The trading price of our common stock is likely to be highly volatile and could be subject to wide fluctuations in response to various factors, some of which are beyond our control, including limited trading volume. In addition to the factors discussed in this section and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, these factors include:
• the commencement, enrollment, completion or results of our current or future preclinical and clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa;
• any delay in identifying and advancing a clinical candidate for our other programs;
• any delay in our regulatory filings for ficerafusp alfa and any adverse development or perceived adverse development with respect to the applicable regulatory authority’s review of such filings, including without limitation the FDA’s issuance of a “refusal to file” letter or a request for additional information;
• adverse results or delays, suspensions or terminations in future preclinical studies or clinical trials;
• our decision to initiate a clinical trial, not to initiate a clinical trial or to terminate an existing clinical trial;
• adverse regulatory decisions, including failure to receive regulatory approval or potential accelerated approval of ficerafusp alfa or the failure of a regulatory authority to accept data from preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted in other countries;
• changes in laws or regulations applicable to ficerafusp alfa, including but not limited to clinical trial requirements for approvals;
• our inability to obtain adequate product supply for any approved product or inability to do so at acceptable prices;
• our inability to establish collaborations, if needed;
• our failure to commercialize ficerafusp alfa, if approved;
• additions or departures of key scientific or management personnel;
• unanticipatedserious safety concerns related to ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates;
• introduction of new products or services offered by us or our competitors;
• announcements of significant acquisitions, strategic partnerships, joint ventures or capital commitments by us or our competitors;
• our ability to effectively manage our growth;
• actual or anticipated variations in operating results;
Table of Contents
• our cash position;
• our failure to meet the estimates and projections of the investment community or that we may otherwise provide to the public;
• publication of research reports about us or our industry, or ficerafusp alfa in particular, or positive or negative recommendations or withdrawal of research coverage by securities analysts;
• changes in the market valuations of similar companies;
• changes in the structure of the healthcare payment systems;
• overall performance of the equity markets;
• sales of our common stock by us or our stockholders in the future;
• trading volume of our common stock;
• changes in accounting practices;
• ineffectiveness of our internal controls;
• disputes or other developments relating to proprietary rights, including patents, litigation matters and our ability to obtain patent protection for our technologies;
• significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation;
• general geopolitical and economic conditions; and
• other events or factors, many of which are beyond our control.
In addition, the stock market in general, and the market for biopharmaceutical companies in particular, have experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities. This type of litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources.
Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations.
Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control and may be difficult to predict, including:
• the timing and cost of, and level of investment in, research, development and, if approved, commercialization activities relating to ficerafusp alfa or any future product candidates, which may change from time to time;
• the timing and status of enrollment for clinical trials;
• the cost of manufacturing ficerafusp alfa, as well as building out our supply chain, which may vary depending on the quantity of production and the terms of our agreements with manufacturers;
• expenditures that we may incur to acquire, develop or commercialize additional product candidates and technologies;
• timing and amount of any milestone, royalty or other payments due under any collaboration or license agreement;
• the timing and success or failure of preclinical studies and clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa or competing product candidates, or any other change in the competitive landscape of our industry, including consolidation among our competitors or partners;
• future accounting pronouncements or changes in our accounting policies;
• the timing and success or failure of preclinical studies and clinical trials for ficerafusp alfa or competing product candidates, or any other change in the competitive landscape of our industry, including consolidation among our competitors or partners;
• the timing of receipt of approvals for ficerafusp alfa from regulatory authorities in the U.S. and internationally;
• exchange rate fluctuations;
• coverage and reimbursement policies with respect to ficerafusp alfa, if approved, and potential future drugs that compete with our products; and
• the level of demand for ficerafusp alfa, if approved, may vary significantly over time.
Table of Contents
The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance.
This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our future revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if any forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a stock price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide.
If securities or industry analysts do not publish research or publish inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price and trading volume could decline.
The trading market for our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that securities or industry analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts who covers us downgrades our stock or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, our stock price may decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, demand for our stock could decrease, which might cause our stock price and trading volume to decline.
Our executive officers, directors, principal stockholders and their respective affiliates own a significant percentage of our stock and will be able to exert significant control over matters subject to stockholder approval.
Based on the beneficial ownership of our common stock as of December 31, 2025, our executive officers, directors, holders of 5% or more of our capital stock and their respective affiliates beneficially own a significant percentage of our common stock. These stockholders, if acting together, will continue to have significant influence over the outcome of corporate actions requiring stockholder approval, including the election of directors, amendment of our organizational documents, any merger, consolidation or sale of all or substantially all of our assets and any other significant corporate transaction. In addition, certain of our principal stockholders, including Biocon, RA Capital and TPG LSA, are affiliated with members of our board of directors. The interests of these stockholders may not be the same as or may even conflict with your interests. For example, these stockholders could delay or prevent a change of control of our company, even if such a change of control would benefit our other stockholders, which could deprive our stockholders of an opportunity to receive a premium for their common stock as part of a sale of our company or our assets and might affect the prevailing market price of our common stock. The significant concentration of stock ownership may adversely affect the trading price of our common stock due to investors’ perception that conflicts of interest may exist or arise.
Future sales or issuances of our common stock in the public market could cause our common stock price to fall.
Our common stock price could decline as a result of sales of a large number of shares of common stock or the perception that these sales could occur. These sales, or the possibility that these sales may occur, might also make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and price that we deem appropriate. For example, in February 2026, we completed our February 2026 Offering of 8,581,250 shares of our common stock and pre-funded warrants to purchase 2,200,000 shares of our common stock. In the future, we may issue additional shares of common stock, or other equity or debt securities convertible into common stock, in connection with a financing, acquisition, employee arrangement, or otherwise. Any such issuance could result in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders and could cause the price of our common stock to decline.
Our issuance of additional capital stock in connection with financings, acquisitions, investments, our stock incentive plans or otherwise will dilute all other stockholders.
We expect to issue additional capital stock in the future, including potentially through our ATM Program, that will result in dilution to all other stockholders. We expect to grant equity awards to employees, directors and consultants under our stock incentive plans. We may also raise capital through equity financings in the future. In addition, as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we had outstanding pre-funded warrants to purchase 2,200,000 shares of our common stock with an exercise price of $0.0001 per share. The pre-funded warrants may be exercised at any time after the date of issuance solely by cashless exercise, at the holder’s election, until all of the pre-funded
Table of Contents
warrants are exercised in full, according to a formula set forth in the pre-funded warrants. Accordingly, we will not receive additional proceeds from the exercise of the pre-funded warrants and issuance of the underlying shares. If some or all of these pre-funded warrants are exercised, our stockholders could experience substantial dilution and such exercise may cause the market price of our stock to decline.
In addition, as part of our business strategy, we may acquire or make investments in complementary companies, products or technologies and issue equity securities to pay for any such acquisition or investment. Any such issuances of additional capital stock may cause stockholders to experience significant dilution of their ownership interests and the per share value of our common stock to decline.
We do not currently intend to pay dividends on our common stock and, consequently, our stockholders’ ability to achieve a return on their investment will depend on appreciation of the value of our common stock.
We have never declared or paid cash dividends on our common stock. We currently intend to retain all available funds and any future earnings to support operations and to finance the growth and development of our business. We do not intend to declare or pay any cash dividends on our capital stock in the foreseeable future. As a result, any investment return on our common stock will depend upon increases in the value for our common stock, which is not certain.
Provisions in our corporate charter documents and under Delaware law could make an acquisition of our company, which may be beneficial to our stockholders, more difficult and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current directors and members of management.
Our fifth amended and restated certificate of incorporation, or our certificate of incorporation, and third amended and restated bylaws, or our bylaws, contain provisions that may discourage, delay or prevent a merger, acquisition or other change in control of our company that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which our stockholders might otherwise receive a premium for their shares. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, because our board of directors is responsible for appointing the members of our management team, these provisions may frustrate or prevent any attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management by making it more difficult for stockholders to replace members of our board of directors. Among other things, these provisions:
• establish a classified board of directors such that only one of three classes of directors is elected each year;
• allow the authorized number of our directors to be changed only by resolution of our board of directors;
• limit the manner in which stockholders can remove directors from our board of directors;
• establish advance notice requirements for stockholder proposals that can be acted on at stockholder meetings and nominations to our board of directors;
• require that stockholder actions must be effected at a duly called stockholder meeting and prohibit actions by our stockholders by written consent;
• limit who may call stockholder meetings;
• authorize our board of directors to issue preferred stock without stockholder approval, which could be used to institute a “poison pill” that would work to dilute the stock ownership of a potential hostile acquirer, effectively preventing acquisitions that have not been approved by our board of directors; and
• require the approval of not less than two-thirds of the votes that all our stockholders would be entitled to cast to amend or repeal specified provisions of our certificate of incorporation or bylaws.
Moreover, because we are incorporated in Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner.
Table of Contents
Our bylaws designate certain courts as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees.
Our bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claims for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of, or a claim based on, fiduciary duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers, and employees to us or our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our certificate of incorporation or our bylaws (including the interpretation, validity or enforceability thereof), or (iv) any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine, in each case subject to the Court of Chancery having personal jurisdiction over the indispensable parties named as defendants therein, or the Delaware Forum Provision. The Delaware Forum Provision will not apply to any causes of action arising under the Securities Act of 1933, or the Securities Act, Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. Furthermore, Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all such Securities Act actions. Accordingly, both state and federal courts have jurisdiction to entertain such claims. To prevent having to litigateclaims in multiple jurisdictions and the threat of inconsistent or contrary rulings by different courts, among other considerations, our bylaws further provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the U.S. shall be the sole and exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause or causes of action arising under the Securities Act, or the Federal Forum Provision. In addition, our bylaws provide that any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our common stock is deemed to have notice of and consented to the foregoing provisions; provided, however, that stockholders cannot and will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.
The Delaware Forum Provision and the Federal Forum Provision in our bylaws may impose additional litigation costs on stockholders in pursuing any such claims. Additionally, the forum selection clauses in our bylaws may limit our stockholders’ ability to bring a claim in a forum that they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees even though an action, if successful, might benefit our stockholders. In addition, while the Delaware Supreme Court ruled in March 2020 that federal forum selection provisions purporting to require claims under the Securities Act be brought in federal court were “facially valid” under Delaware law, there is uncertainty as to whether other courts will enforce our Federal Forum Provision. If the Federal Forum Provision is found to be unenforceable, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters. The Federal Forum Provision may also impose additional litigation costs on stockholders who assert that the provision is not enforceable or invalid. The Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the federal district courts of the U.S. may also reach different judgments or results than would other courts, including courts where a stockholder considering an action may be located or would otherwise choose to bring the action, and such judgments may be more or less favorable to us than our stockholders.
We may not be able to satisfy listing requirements of Nasdaq or maintain a listing of our common stock on Nasdaq.
We must meet certain financial and liquidity criteria to maintain the listing of our common stock on Nasdaq. If we fail to meet any of Nasdaq’s listing standards, our common stock may be delisted. In addition, our board of directors may determine that the cost of maintaining our listing on a national securities exchange outweighs the benefits of such listing. A delisting of our common stock from Nasdaq may materially impair our stockholders’ ability to buy and sell our common stock and could have an adverse effect on the market price of, and the efficiency of the trading market for, our common stock. The delisting of our common stock could significantly impair our ability to raise capital and the value of your investment.
Other General Risks
Unfavorable global economic and geopolitical conditions could adversely affect our business, financial condition, stock price and results of operations.
Our business could be adversely affected by unstable economic and political conditions within the United States and foreign jurisdictions, including as a result of an economic downturn and geopolitical events, such as changes in U.S. federal policy that affect the geopolitical landscape. Changes to policy implemented by the U.S. Congress, the
Table of Contents
current administration or any new administration have impacted and may in the future impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade relations, unemployment, immigration, healthcare, taxation, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas. In early 2025, the United States imposed tariffs on imports on its trading partners, including Canada, Mexico, the EU and China. Historically, tariffs have led to increased trade and political tensions, between not only the U.S. and China, but also between the U.S. and other countries in the international community. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. Additionally, in September 2025, the current administration also announced a 100% tariff on brand-name or patented drugs unless pharmaceutical companies expand their manufacturing operations in the U.S. Although the pharmaceutical tariff is currently on hold, this could have a material adverse effect on our supply chain and business prospects as well as the larger biopharmaceutical industry. On February 20, 2026, the United States Supreme Court invalidated the reciprocal tariffs; however, President Trump has stated that he intends to use other authorities to maintain historically elevated tariffs. Historically, increased tariffs have led to more trade and political tensions and the status of these agreements between the United States and the various countries, in light of the U.S. Supreme Court’s February 20, 2026 decision, is not yet clear. Any changes in political, trade, regulatory, and economic conditions, including U.S. trade policies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations.
The global credit and financial markets have also experienced extreme volatility and disruptions (including as a result of actual or perceived changes in interest rates, inflation and macroeconomic uncertainties), which has included severelydiminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, high inflation, uncertainty about economic stability, global supply chain disruptions, and increases in unemployment rates. The financial markets and the global economy may also be adversely affected by military conflict, including the ongoing conflicts between Russia and Ukraine, the conflict in the Middle East, or other geopolitical events. There can be no assurance that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including a decrease in the demand for our drug candidates and in our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. For example, there has been proposed U.S. legislation that may restrict the ability of U.S. biopharmaceutical companies to purchase services or products from, or otherwise collaborate with, certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. We continue to assess the legislation as it develops to determine whether it could have an effect on our contractual relationships. Furthermore, any disruptions to our supply chain as a result of unfavorable global economic conditions, including due to geopolitical conflicts or public health crises, could negatively impact the timely execution of our ongoing and future clinical trials. In addition, current inflationary trends in the global economy may impact salaries and wages, costs of goods and transportation expenses, among other things, and recent and potential future disruptions in access to bank deposits or lending commitments due to bank failures may create market and economic instability. We cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the foregoing, and the current economic climate and financial market conditions generally, could adversely impact our business.
We, or the third parties upon whom we depend, may be adversely affected by natural disasters, public health crises or other business interruptions and our business continuity and disaster recovery plans may not adequately protect us from a seriousdisaster.
Natural disasters or public health crises could severelydisrupt our operations, and have a material adverse impact on our business, results of operations, financial condition, and prospects. If a natural disaster, power outage, public health crisis or other event occurred that prevented us from conducting our clinical trials, releasing clinical trial results or delaying our ability to obtain regulatory approval for ficerafusp alfa, it may be difficult or, in certain cases, impossible for us to continue our business for a substantial period of time.
Our information technology systems, or those used by our CROs or other contractors or consultants, may fail or suffer cybersecurity incidents or breaches, which could adversely affect our business.
Despite the implementation of security measures, our information technology systems and data and those of our current or future CROs or other contractors and consultants are vulnerable to compromise or damage from computer hacking, computer viruses, social engineering (e.g., phishing attacks) and malware (e.g., ransomware malicious
Table of Contents
software), fraudulent activity, employee and vendor misconduct, human error, telecommunication and electrical failures, natural disasters, or other cybersecurity attacks or accidents. Future acquisitions could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities from any newly acquired information technology infrastructure. Cybersecurity attacks are constantly increasing in frequency and sophistication and are made by groups and individuals with a wide range of motives (including industrial espionage) and expertise, including by organized criminal groups, “hacktivists,” nation states, and others.
Attempts to disrupt or gainunauthorized access to our and our third-party vendors’ information systems from malicious third parties or insider threats may incorporate widely varying and frequently changing tactics, which may be enhanced or facilitated by evolving technologies, including artificial intelligence. As a result of a continued hybrid working environment, we may also face increased cybersecurity risks due to our reliance on internet technology and the number of our employees who are working remotely, which may create additional opportunities for cybercriminals to exploitvulnerabilities. Furthermore, because the techniques used to obtain unauthorized access to, or to sabotage systems change frequently and often are not recognized until launched against a target, we may be unable to anticipate these techniques or implement adequate preventative measures. Further, as a company with an increasingly global presence, our systems are subject to frequent attacks, which are becoming more commonplace in the industry, including attempted hacking, phishing attempts, such as cyber-related threats involving spoofed or manipulated electronic communications, which increasingly represent considerable risk. Due to the nature of some of the attacks described herein, there is a risk that an attack may remain undetected for a period of time. Even if identified, we may be unable to adequatelyinvestigate or remediate cybersecurity incidents or breaches due to attackers increasingly using tools and techniques that are designed to circumvent controls, to avoid detection, and to remove or obfuscate forensic evidence. While we continue to make investments to improve the protection of data and information technology, there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent service interruptions or cybersecurity incidents or breaches.
Like other companies in our industry, we and our service providers have experienced threats and cybersecurity incidents relating to our information technology systems and infrastructure. Any significant cybersecurity incident could adversely affect our business, by leading to, for example, the loss of trade secrets or other intellectual property, demands for ransom or other forms of blackmail, or the unauthorized disclosure of personal or other sensitive information of our employees, clinical trial patients, customers, and others. If we were to experience a significant cybersecurity incident, it could seriouslyharm our development programs and our business operations. We could be subject to cybersecurity incident or breach notification requirements, regulatory actions taken by governmental authorities, litigation under laws that protect the privacy of personal information, or other forms of legal proceedings, which could result in significant liabilities or penalties, result in substantial costs and require attention from management. Further, a significant cybersecurity incident or breach may disrupt our business or damage our reputation, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, operating results, share price and shareholder value, and financial condition. We could also incur substantial remediation costs, including the costs of investigating the incident, repairing or replacing damaged systems, restoring normal business operations, implementing increased cybersecurity protections, and paying increased insurance premiums.
For example, the loss of clinical trial data from completed, ongoing or future clinical trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. If a cybersecurity breach or other incident were to result in the unauthorized access to or unauthorized use, disclosure, release or other processing of clinical trial data or personal data, it may be necessary to notify individuals, governmental authorities, supervisory bodies, the media, and other parties pursuant to privacy and security laws. Likewise, we rely on our third-party research institution collaborators for research and development of ficerafusp alfa and other third parties for the manufacture of ficerafusp alfa and to conduct clinical trials, and similar events relating to their information technology systems could also seriouslyharm our business. Any security compromise affecting us, our collaborators or our industry, whether real or perceived, could harm our reputation, erode confidence in the effectiveness of our security measures, and lead to regulatory scrutiny.
To the extent that any disruption or significant cybersecurity incident or breach were to result in a loss of, or damage to, our data or systems, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary or personal information, we could incur liability, our competitive position could be harmed, and the further development and commercialization of ficerafusp alfa could be delayed, result in substantial costs and require attention from management. Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our privacy and
Table of Contents
data security obligations. Further, although we maintain cyber liability insurance, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities related to any significant cybersecurity incident or breach.
We are eligible to be treated as an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” and our election of reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.
We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, as an emerging growth company, we are only required to provide two years of audited financial statements. We could be an emerging growth company until the earliest to occur of: (i) the last day of the fiscal year in which we have more than $1.235 billion in total annual gross revenue. (ii) the date we qualify as a “large accelerated filer,” which occurs when the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million of equity securities held by non-affiliates; (iii) the date on which we have issued more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during the prior three-year period; and (iv) the last day of the fiscal year ending after the fifth anniversary of our IPO. For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. These exemptions include:
• not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404;
• not being required to comply with any requirement that may be adopted by the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding mandatory audit firm rotation or a supplement to the auditor’s report providing additional information about the audit and the financial statements;
• providing only two years of audited financial statements in addition to any required unaudited interim financial statements and a correspondingly reduced “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” disclosure in this Annual Report on Form 10-K;
• reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation; and
• exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and shareholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our periodic reports and proxy statements, we have not included and do not expect to include all of the executive compensation-related information that would be required if we were not an emerging growth company.
Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we could still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our periodic reports and proxy statements. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our share price may be more volatile.
In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can also take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have elected to avail ourselves of this exemption from new or revised accounting standards, and therefore we will not be subject to the same requirements to adopt new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies.
We are also a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company even after we are no longer an emerging growth company. We may take advantage of certain of the scaled disclosures available to smaller reporting companies and will be able to take advantage of these scaled disclosures for so long as our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250.0 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter, or our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently
Table of Contents
completed fiscal year and our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700.0 million measured on the last business day of our second fiscal quarter.
We will continue to incur increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management need to devote substantial time to related compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices.
As a public company, we are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Protection Act, as well as rules adopted, and to be adopted, by the SEC and Nasdaq. Our management and other personnel need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, we expect these rules and regulations to continue to require that we incur substantial legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly, which will increase our operating expenses. We cannot accurately predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers.
If we fail to establish and maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting, we may not be able to accurately report our financial results or prevent fraud. As a result, stockholders could lose confidence in our financial and other public reporting, which would harm our business and the trading price of our common stock.
Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be reevaluated frequently. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles. We have implemented the process of documenting, reviewing and improving our internal controls and procedures for compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, which requires annual management assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting beginning with this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Any failure to implement required new or improved controls, or difficulties encountered in their implementation could cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. In addition, any testing by us conducted in connection with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or any subsequent testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls over financial reporting that are deemed to be material weaknesses or that may require prospective or retroactive changes to our financial statements or identify other areas for further attention or improvement. Inferior internal controls could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial information, which could have a negative effect on the trading price of our stock.
We are required to disclose changes made in our internal controls and procedures on a quarterly basis and our management is required to assess the effectiveness of these controls annually. However, for as long as we are an emerging growth company or a non-accelerated filer, our independent registered public accounting firm will not be required to attest to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting pursuant to Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years following our IPO. An independent assessment of the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting could detect problems that our management’s assessment might not. Undetected material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting could lead to restatements of our financial statements and require us to incur the expense of remediation.
Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud.
We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We must design our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized, and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty, and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertentlyfail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make a required related party transaction disclosure. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls.
Table of Contents
Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected.
Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and other tax attributes may be limited.
As of December 31, 2025, we had approx imately $191.6 million of federal net operating losses, or NOLs. Federal NOLs generated in taxable years since inception, may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such federal NOLs is limited to 80% of our taxable income. As of December 31, 2025, we had approximately $187.4 million of state NOLs. Of the state NOLs, some are of indefinite life, but most are of definite life with various expiration dates, beginning in 2039. As of December 31, 2025, we had approximately $7.5 million of federal research and development tax credit carryforwards. Federal tax credit carryforwards expire at various dates, beginning in 2040. As of December 31, 2025, we had approximately $1.0 million of state research and development tax credit carryforwards. The state tax credits, which have various carryforward rules, begin to expire in 2035.
Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by one or more “5-percent shareholders” over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. A corporation that experiences an ownership change will generally be subject to an annual limitation on the use of its pre-ownership change NOLs equal to the value of the corporation immediately before the ownership change, multiplied by the long-term tax-exempt rate (subject to certain adjustments). We may have experienced ownership changes in the past and may experience ownership changes as a result of our acquisitions of assets and/or subsequent shifts in our stock ownership (some of which are outside our control). There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs by federal or state taxing authorities or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to reduce future income tax liabilities. As a result, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs and tax credits to offset future taxable income, if any, could be subject to limitations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply. As a result, even if we attainprofitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and tax credits.
Changes in tax law could adversely affect our business and financial condition.
The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application), including with respect to NOLs and research and development tax credits, could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. For example, the OBBBA was signed into law on July 4, 2025 and made significant changes to U.S. federal tax law. Under Section 174 of the Code, in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed outside the U.S. will be capitalized and amortized, which may have an adverse effect on our cash flow. The OBBBA provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed in the U.S. may, at the taxpayer’s election, be immediately deducted or capitalized and amortized. In addition, the OBBBA provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021 and before January 1, 2025, certain eligible taxpayers generally may elect to retroactively deduct expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years by filing amended tax returns for such taxable years, and all other taxpayers that are not eligible to make such an election and that amortized expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years generally may elect to accelerate and deduct the remaining unamortized amounts of such research and development expenses (i) in the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024, or (ii) ratably over the two-taxable year period beginning with the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024. In recent years, many changes to tax laws have been made and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. Future changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. We urge investors to consult with their legal and tax advisers regarding the implications of potential changes in tax laws on an investment in our common stock.
We may become involved in securities class action litigation that could divert management’s attention and harm our business, and insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all costs and damages.
In the past, securities class action litigation has often followed certain significant business transactions, such as the sale of a company or announcement of any other strategic transaction, or the announcement of negative events, such
Table of Contents
as negative results from clinical trials. These events may also result in or be concurrent with investigations by the SEC. We may be exposed to such litigation or investigation even if no wrongdoing occurred. Litigation and investigations are usually expensive and divert management’s attention and resources, which could adversely affect our business and cash resources and our ability to consummate a potential strategic transaction or the ultimate value our stockholders receive in any such transaction.
