Item 1A. Risk Factors.
Our business is subject to various risks, including those described below. The risks below are those that we believe are the material risks that we currently face but are not the only risks facing us and our business. You should consider the following risk factors, together with all of the other information included in this Report, which could materially adversely affect our proposed operations, our business prospects, our financial condition, and the value of an investment in our business. If any of the following risks, either alone or taken together, or other risks not presently known to us or that we currently believe to not be significant, develop into actual events, then our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects could be materially adversely affected. If that happens, the market price of our common stock could decline, and stockholders may lose all or part of their investment.
Risks Related to Our Capital Resources
We have incurred operating losses since inception, and we do not know if we will attain profitability.
Since our inception in September 2009, we have incurred operating losses and negative cash flows and we expect to continue to incur losses and negative cash flows in the future. Our net losses for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024 were $50.2 million and $60.7 million, respectively, and we had an accumulated deficit of $400.8 million as of December 31, 2025. We finance our operations primarily through sales of our common stock. There is no assurance that we will be able to obtain any additional financing that we may need, or that any such financing that may become available will be on terms that are favorable to us and our shareholders. Ultimately, our ability to generate sufficient operating revenue to earn a profit depends upon our success in developing and marketing or licensing our diagnostic tests and technology.
We have historically been dependent upon outside financing capital to fund our operations and until such time as our revenues are sufficient to finance our operating expenses, we may need to issue additional equity or debt securities to raise the capital needed to pay our operating expenses.
We plan to continue to incur substantial research and development expenses, and we anticipate that we will be incurring significant sales and marketing costs as we develop and commercialize our diagnostic tests. Our research and development expenses may also increase if we work to develop tests for additional types of cancer or for other cancer-related diagnostic purposes. The period of time for which our current cash and marketable securities will be sufficient to finance our operations will depend on the extent to which we expend funds on commercializing our tests and conducting new research and development programs. We will need to raise additional capital to pay operating expenses unless we are able to generate sufficient revenues from diagnostic test sales, royalties, and license fees to meet our operating expenses.
Our ability to raise additional equity or debt capital will depend not only on the successful completion of development of our diagnostic tests and receiving reimbursement approval from Medicare and other third-party payers for those tests, but also will depend on access to capital and conditions in the capital markets. Obtaining Medicare reimbursement approval for our diagnostic tests could take two to three years, and investors may be reluctant to provide us with additional capital until we obtain Medicare reimbursement approval for those tests or until we can demonstrate that private payers such as health insurance companies or HMOs are willing to pay for the use of our diagnostic tests at prices sufficient for us to earn a reasonable return on our investments in our diagnostic test portfolio. There is no assurance that we will be able to raise capital at times and in amounts needed to finance the development and commercialization of our diagnostic tests and general operations. Even if capital is available, it may not be available on terms that we or our shareholders would consider favorable. If we are unable to obtain adequate financing or financing on terms satisfactory to us when and if we require it, our ability to continue to support our business growth and to respond to business challenges could be significantly impaired, and our business may be harmed.
Sales or other issuances of additional equity securities by us could result in the dilution of the interests of our stockholders, and any new equity securities we issue could have rights, preferences and privileges superior to those of holders of our common stock.
Table of Contents
We may incur significant cash payment and common stock issuance obligations under our agreements arising from our investments in IGI and Chronix.
Under the merger agreement pursuant to which we acquired IGI, as described in Note 3 to the consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Report, based on current estimates, we agreed to pay contingent consideration of up to $4.5 million in any combination of cash or shares of our common stock if certain milestones related to DetermaIO are achieved, which consist of (i) $3.0 million for an affirmative final LCD from CMS for a specified lung cancer test, and (ii) up to $1.5 million for achieving certain CMS reimbursement milestones.
As additional consideration for the acquisition of Chronix, we agreed to pay to holders of other classes and series of Chronix’s stock earnout consideration of (i) 10% of net collections for sales of specified tests and products, until the expiration of intellectual property related to such tests and products, and (ii) 5% of the gross proceeds received from any sale of all or substantially all of the rights, titles, and interests in and to Chronix’s patents for use in transplantation medicine to such third party.
To meet these various cash payment obligations, we may need to sell additional shares of our common stock or other securities, or we may have to divert cash on hand that we would otherwise use for other business and operational purposes which could cause us to delay or reduce activities in the development and commercialization of our cancer tests. Any shares of common stock or other securities we sell to raise cash to meet our cash payment obligations will dilute the interests of our common stockholders.
Risks Related to Our Business Operations
Our revenues in the near term will depend on our ability to commercialize a small number of diagnostic tests.
Our near-term commercial efforts will focus on maximizing the opportunities for GraftAssureCore , GraftAssureIQ, GraftAssureDx, DetermaIO and DetermaCNI. Our reliance on a small group of diagnostic tests as sources of revenue could limit our future revenue, make it more difficult for us to finance our operations, and impair our prospects for profitability and growth. DetermaIO and GraftAssureCore are currently available only in early access for non-clinical use. We plan to continue development of all five of such products for clinical and research use. However, there is no assurance that our development plans for GraftAssureCore , GraftAssureIQ, GraftAssureDx, DetermaIO or DetermaCNI will be successful or that we will generate sufficient revenues from commercialization of our diagnostic tests to finance our operations and earn a profit.
The research and development work we are doing is costly, time consuming, and uncertain as to its results.
We incurred research and development expenses amounting to approximately $15.9 million and $9.8 million during the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. The current focus of our research and development efforts is the development of GraftAssureCore, GraftAssureIQ and GraftAssureDx, and in 2025, we started a clinical trial in conjunction with our IVD submission for GraftAssureDx . If we are successful in developing a new technology or diagnostic tests for additional types of cancer, refinement of the new technology or diagnostic tests and definition of the practical applications and limitations of the technology or diagnostic tests may take years and require the expenditure of large sums of money. There is no assurance that we will be successful in completing the development of our current diagnostic tests or in developing additional diagnostic tests regardless of the amount of our expenditures.
Increased competition from, and technological advances by, our competitors could negatively affect our operating results.
We face intense competition, and we expect that future competition will become even more intense as new products, services and technologies become available, the use of AI and machine learning expands, and new competitors enter our industry. Our competitors in the diagnostics technology industry in the United States and abroad include companies that develop, manufacture, and sell diagnostic tests; commercial reference laboratories; certain large and well-funded pharmaceutical companies; and corporate hospital chains that operate reference laboratories that serve both their hospitals and unaffiliated hospitals. Consolidation among our competitors and our customers may intensify the competition we face. While we believe that our offerings are competitively differentiated due to our innovative products and services that offer an integrated, comprehensive diagnostic solution, there can be no assurance that increased consolidation among our competitors or customers would not have a negative impact on our ability to compete successfully.
Table of Contents
Competition could negatively affect our sales and profitability in a number of ways. New competitors may emerge through the development of innovative new technology (such as the use of AI and machine learning), the acquisition of rights to use existing technologies or the use of existing technologies when patents protecting such existing technologies expire. New or existing competitors may introduce new, innovative, and competitive products and services more quickly, successfully and effectively, and these products and services could be superior, or be perceived by our customers to be superior, to our products and services or lead to the obsolescence of one or more of our products or services. Business combinations and mergers among our competitors may result in competitors that are better positioned to create, market, and sell more compelling product and service offerings. While an important aspect of our strategy is to continue, on a cost-effective and timely basis, to enhance our existing products and services and to develop and introduce new and innovative products and services, there can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully develop or introduce such products and services or that those products or services will be superior to our competitors’ products or services or otherwise achieve customer acceptance. In addition, our ability to attract and retain customers depends on the effectiveness of our customer marketing and incentive programs, and multiple competitors could bundle product and service offerings through co-marketing or other arrangements, which could enhance their ability to compete with our broad product and service offerings. Certain of our competitors and potential competitors, including large diagnostic and pharmaceutical companies, also have substantially greater financial and managerial resources than us, as well as greater experience in manufacturing, marketing, research and development, and obtaining regulatory approvals than we do.
Sales of our diagnostic tests could be adversely impacted by the reluctance of physicians to adopt the use of our tests and by the availability of competing diagnostic tests.
Physicians and hospitals may be reluctant to try a new diagnostic test due to the high degree of risk associated with the application of new technologies and diagnostic tests in the field of human medicine, especially if the new tests differ from the current standard of care. Competing tests for organ transplant rejection monitoring and the initial diagnosis, reoccurrence diagnosis and optimal treatment of cancer are being manufactured and marketed by established companies and by other smaller biotechnology companies. In order to compete with other diagnostic tests, particularly any that sell at lower prices, our tests will have to provide medically significant advantages or be more cost effective. Even if we are able to overcome physician reluctance and compete with products that are currently on the market, our competitors may succeed in developing new safer, more accurate or more cost-effective diagnostic tests that could render our diagnostic tests and technologies obsolete or noncompetitive.
Defects, failures or quality issues associated with our products could lead to product recalls or safety alerts, adverse regulatory actions, product liability lawsuits and other litigation and negative publicity. If we are unable to obtain or maintain sufficient insurance, a product liability claim against us could adversely affect our business.
Our business exposes us to potential product liability risks that are inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of diagnostic test kits and assays. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our clinical development programs. In addition, if any of our collaboration partners face product liability claims, our programs could also be affected, and our business could be harmed. If we succeed in marketing products, such claims could result in an FDA investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our products, our manufacturing processes and facilities or our marketing programs, and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used, or suspension or withdrawal of approvals. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our products, injury to our reputation, costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management’s time and our resources, substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients and a decline in our share price.
We may not be able to maintain such insurance on acceptable terms or be able to secure increased coverage as commercialization of our products progresses, nor can we be sure that existing or future claims against us will be covered by our product liability insurance. Any insurance we obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Product liability insurance for the healthcare industry and for clinical trials may, and have become, become increasingly expensive, to the extent it is available at all. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain or maintain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost or contractual indemnifications to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could adversely affect our business.
Table of Contents
We have limited capital, marketing, sales, and regulatory compliance resources for the commercialization of our diagnostic tests.
We are building our own marketing and sales capability for our diagnostic tests and are devoting significant financial and management resources to recruiting, training, and managing our sales force and building a health care regulatory compliance program. However, due to our limited capital resources, we may need to enter into marketing arrangements with other diagnostic companies for one or more of our tests in domestic or foreign markets. Under such marketing arrangements we may license marketing rights to one or more of our diagnostic tests to other diagnostic companies or to one or more joint venture companies that may be formed to market our tests, and we might receive only a royalty on sales or an equity interest in a joint venture company. As a result, our revenues from the sale of our tests through such arrangements may be substantially less than the amount of revenues and gross profits that we might receive if we were to market our tests ourselves.
We may face technology transfer challenges and expenses in adding new tests to our portfolio and in expanding our reach into new geographical areas on new instrument platforms.
Our plan for expanding our business includes developing and acquiring additional tests that can be transferred into our current lab footprint in the United States and/or onto molecular testing instrument platforms for distribution in non-U.S. markets. Due to differences in the hardware and software platforms available at different laboratories for running molecular tests, we may need to make adjustments to the configuration of the reagents that make up our LDTs in our U.S. laboratory or as we convert them to kits, and there may be changes to the related software in order for the tests to be performed on particular hardware platforms. Making any such adjustments could take a considerable amount of time and expense, and there will be no assurance that we will succeed in running our tests on the hardware and software that we may encounter in different laboratories. To manage this issue and to attain uniformity among our laboratory locations, we may license or acquire our own instrument system and software from another company that has a platform that will be compatible with our tests. In addition to acquisition costs, operationally we will have to build out infrastructure for installing a new testing platform across multiple laboratory locations as well as support functions to help maintain these instrument systems in new customer labs, and we may also encounter unexpected technology issues in the process.
If our laboratory facilities become damaged or inoperable, or we are required to vacate any facility, our ability to provide services and pursue our research and development and commercialization efforts may be jeopardized.
We currently have a clinical laboratory facility in Franklin, Tennessee. We also have research and development labs in Nashville, Tennessee and Göttingen, Germany. Our facilities and equipment could be harmed or rendered inoperable by natural or man-made disasters, including earthquakes, power outages, wildfires, flooding, hurricanes, droughts and other extreme weather events and changing weather patterns, which are increasing in frequency due to the impacts of climate change, and may render it difficult or impossible for us to perform our tests for some period of time. The inability to perform our tests or the backlog of tests that could develop if any of our facilities is inoperable for even a short period of time may result in the loss of customers or harm to our reputation or relationships with key researchers, collaborators, and customers, and we may be unable to regain those customers or repair our reputation in the future. Furthermore, our facilities and the equipment we use to perform our research and development work could be costly and time-consuming to repair or replace.
Additionally, a key component of our research and development process involves using biological samples and the resulting data sets and medical histories, as the basis for our diagnostic test development. In some cases, these samples are difficult to obtain. If the parts of our laboratory facilities where we store these biological samples are damaged or compromised, our ability to pursue our research and development projects, commercialization of our diagnostic tests, as well as our reputation, could be jeopardized. We carry insurance for damage to our property and the disruption of our business, but this insurance may not be sufficient to cover all of our potential losses and may not continue to be available to us on acceptable terms, if at all.
Further, if our laboratories become inoperable, we may not be able to license or transfer our proprietary technology to a third-party, with established state licensure and CLIA certification under the scope of which our diagnostic tests could be performed following validation and other required procedures, to perform the tests.
Even if we find a third-party with such qualifications to perform our tests, such party may not be willing to perform the tests for us on commercially reasonable terms. Moreover, we believe our tests are currently subject to enforcement discretion by the FDA because we believe the tests currently qualify as LDTs. If, however, we are required to find a third-party laboratory to conduct our testing services, we believe this would change our status and the FDA would consider such tests offered through a third-party to then be a medical device subject to active FDA regulation and enforcement under its IVD authorities. In that case, we may be required to obtain premarket clearance or approval prior to offering, or continuing to offer, our tests, which would be time-consuming and costly and could result in interruptions and delays in our ability to sell or offer our tests.
Table of Contents
There is a limited number of manufacturers of molecular diagnostic testing equipment and related chemical reagents necessary for the provision of our diagnostic tests.
There is a limited number of manufacturers of molecular testing equipment and related chemical reagents necessary for the provision of our tests. If issues were to arise with our equipment or if reagents we are using cause us to acquire different diagnostic testing equipment, we would need to conduct validation and analytic studies to determine whether our previous test results can be reproduced using the new equipment. As a result, we could experience delays again in developing our diagnostic tests. If similar issues were to arise after commercialization of a diagnostic test, we could experience a disruption in providing the diagnostic tests to patients and we would lose revenues and potentially market share as a result.
If we fail to enter into and maintain successful strategic alliances for diagnostic tests that we elect to co-develop, co-market, or out-license, we may have to reduce or delay our diagnostic test development or increase our expenditures.
In order to facilitate the development, manufacture and commercialization of our diagnostic tests we may enter into strategic alliances with diagnostic, pharmaceutical, or medical device companies to advance our programs and enable us to maintain our financial and operational capacity. We will face significant competition in seeking appropriate alliances. We may not be able to negotiate alliances on acceptable terms, if at all. If we fail to create and maintain suitable alliances, we may have to limit the size or scope of, or delay, one or more of our product development or research programs, or we will have to increase our expenditures and will need to obtain additional funding, which may be unavailable or available only on unfavorable terms.
If we are able to enter into development and marketing arrangements with diagnostic, pharmaceutical or medical device companies for our diagnostic tests, we may license product development, manufacturing, and marketing rights to the diagnostic, pharmaceutical or medical device company or to a joint venture company formed with the diagnostic, pharmaceutical or medical device company. Under such arrangements we might receive only a royalty on sales of the diagnostic tests developed or an equity interest in a joint venture company that develops the diagnostic test. As a result, our revenues from the sale of those diagnostic tests may be substantially less than the amount of revenues and gross profits that we might receive if we were to develop, manufacture, and market the diagnostic tests ourselves.
We are, and may become, dependent on collaborations to develop and commercialize our diagnostic test candidates and to provide the manufacturing, regulatory compliance, sales, marketing and distribution capabilities required for the success of our business.
We have entered into and may in the future enter into various kinds of collaborative research and development, manufacturing, and diagnostic test marketing agreements to develop and commercialize our diagnostic tests. For example, in 2024, we entered into an agreement with Bio-Rad to collaborate in the development and the commercialization of RUO and IVD kitted transplant products using Bio-Rad’s ddPCR instruments and reagents, pursuant to which we are dependent on Bio-Rad with respect to many of our ongoing operations and future target performance.
Any future milestone payments and cost reimbursements from collaboration agreements could provide an important source of financing for our research and development programs, thereby facilitating the application of our technology to the development and commercialization of our diagnostic tests, but there are risks associated with entering into collaboration arrangements.
There is a risk that we could become dependent upon one or more collaborative arrangements, in addition to the Bio-Rad arrangement, for diagnostic test development or manufacturing or as a source of revenues from the sale of any diagnostic tests that may be developed by us alone or through one of the collaborative arrangements. A collaborative arrangement upon which we currently, or might in the future, depend might be terminated by our collaboration partner or they might determine not to actively pursue the development or commercialization of our diagnostic tests, or they may determine to stop supporting technologies, such as instruments or consumables, upon which our diagnostic tests are reliant. A collaboration partner also may not be precluded from independently pursuing competing diagnostic tests or technologies.
There is a risk that a collaboration partner, including Bio-Rad, might fail to perform its obligations under the collaborative arrangements or may be slow in performing its obligations. In addition, a collaboration partner may experience financial difficulties at any time that could prevent it from having available funds to contribute to the collaboration. If a collaboration partner fails to conduct its diagnostic test or instrument-related development, manufacturing, commercialization, regulatory compliance, sales and marketing or distribution activities successfully and in a timely manner, or if it terminates or materially modifies its agreements with us, the development and commercialization of one or more diagnostic test candidates could be delayed, curtailed or terminated because we may not have sufficient financial resources or capabilities to continue diagnostic test development, manufacturing, and commercialization on our own.
Table of Contents
Our business could be adversely affected if we lose the services of the key personnel upon whom we depend.
We presently rely on a small senior management team to direct our diagnostics program and our initial commercial activities. Accordingly, the loss of the services of one or more of the members of that management team could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Our business and operations could suffer in the event of system failures.
We depend on information technology and telecommunications systems, including a combination of on-site systems, managed data center systems, cloud-based systems, and the Internet, for significant elements of our operations, including processing, transmitting, and storing a wide variety of business-critical information. Despite the implementation of security measures, our internal computer systems and those of our contractors and consultants are vulnerable to damage from computer viruses, ransomware, unauthorized access, natural disasters, terrorism, war and telecommunication and electrical failures. Such events could cause interruption of our operations, downtime of our information technology or telecommunications systems or those used by our third-party service providers, and could have an adverse effect on our business and results of operations. For example, the loss of data for our diagnostic test candidates could result in delays in our regulatory filings and development efforts and significantly increase our costs. To the extent that any disruption or security breach results in a loss of or damage to our data, or inappropriate disclosure of confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability under federal or state laws, be subject to litigation, and the development of our diagnostic test candidates could be delayed.
In addition, in an effort to innovate and optimize operational efficiency, certain third parties with whom we work may integrate AI into various aspects of their work with us. We do not currently utilize AI tools in a significant way. While AI presents opportunities for enhanced productivity and innovation, it also introduces inherent risks, including legal and regulatory, that could adversely impact our business and reputation. Improper use of AI, including algorithmic biases, ethical considerations, data privacy issues, unknown or zero-day software vulnerabilities, and potential regulatory non-compliance, by our employees or third parties with whom we work could result in reputational damage, legal liabilities, and financial losses. The rapidly evolving regulatory landscape surrounding AI also poses a risk, as new laws and regulations could impose additional compliance burdens, resulting in increased operational costs. While we are committed to mitigating these risks, such measures may not adequately prevent or mitigate the adverse effects that the integration and use of AI may have on our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
Security breaches and other disruptions could compromise our information and expose us to liability, and could cause our business and reputation to suffer.
In the ordinary course of business, we collect and store sensitive data, including intellectual property, our proprietary business information and that of our business partners, PHI, and personally identifiable information of patients and employees. We manage and maintain our applications and data utilizing a combination of on-site systems, managed data center systems and cloud-based systems. We also communicate PHI and other sensitive data through our various tools and platforms. In addition to storing and transmitting sensitive data that is subject to legal protections, these applications and data encompass a wide variety of business-critical information, including research and development information, commercial information, and business and financial information. The secure processing, maintenance, and transmission of this information is critical to our operations and business strategy.
We face a number of risks relative to protecting our information, including loss of access, inappropriate disclosure, inappropriate modification, and the risk of our being unable to adequately monitor and modify our controls over our critical information. Despite our security measures, our information technology and infrastructure are also vulnerable to attacks by hackers, viruses, ransomware or breaches due to employee error, technical error, malfeasance, or other disruptions.
These types of problems may be caused by a variety of factors, including infrastructure changes, intentional or accidental human actions or omissions, software errors, malware, security attacks, fraud, spikes in customer usage and denial of service issues. From time to time, large third-party web hosting providers have also experienced outages or other problems that have resulted in their systems being offline and inaccessible. In addition to data security risks, we also face privacy risks. Should we violate, or be perceived to have violated, any privacy promises we make to patients or consumers, we could be subject to a complaint from an affected individual or interested privacy regulator, such as the FTC or a state Attorney General. This risk is heightened given the sensitivity of the data we collect.
Table of Contents
Any problems that may arise in connection with our data and systems, including those that are hosted by third-party providers, could result in interruptions to our business and operations or exposure to security vulnerabilities. Any such breach or interruption, whether of our systems or that of our third-party service providers or their subcontractors, could also compromise our networks, and the information stored there could be accessed, publicly disclosed, lost, or stolen. Any such access, disclosure, theft, or other loss of information or privacy or security compromise could result in legal claims or proceedings or liability under federal or state laws that protect the privacy or security of personal information, including HIPAA, HITECH, and state data security and data breach notification laws. Any data privacy or security event could also disrupt our operations and damage our reputation, any of which could adversely affect our business.
If a privacy or security event occurs, we may be required to comply with state breach notification laws and become subject to mandatory corrective action. Penalties for failure to comply with a requirement of HIPAA or HITECH vary significantly, and, depending on the knowledge and culpability of the HIPAA-regulated entity, may include civil monetary penalties for each provision of HIPAA that is violated. A person who knowingly obtains or discloses individually identifiable health information in violation of HIPAA may face a criminal penalty including fines and potential imprisonment. The criminal penalties increase if the wrongful conduct involves false pretenses or the intent to sell, transfer or use identifiable health information for commercial advantage, personal gain or malicious harm. Penalties for unfair or deceptive acts or practices under the FTC Act or state Unfair and Deceptive Acts and Practices statutes may also vary significantly.
Also, even if we do not incur an interruption of our operations, or fines, penalties, or financial liability to third parties from a security breach, we could suffer a loss of confidence in our services, which could adversely affect our business and competitive position. A security event could also result in the compromise of our trade secrets and other proprietary information, which could adversely affect our competitive position.
Failure of our internal control over financial reporting could harm our business and financial results.
Our management is responsible for establishing and maintaining adequate internal control over financial reporting. Internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting for external purposes in accordance with accounting principles generally accepted in the United States. Internal control over financial reporting includes maintaining records that in reasonable detail accurately and fairly reflect our transactions; providing reasonable assurance that transactions are recorded as necessary for preparation of our consolidated financial statements; providing reasonable assurance that receipts and expenditures of our assets are made in accordance with management authorization; and providing reasonable assurance that unauthorized acquisition, use or disposition of our assets that could have a material effect on the consolidated financial statements would be prevented or detected on a timely basis. Due to its inherent limitations, internal control over financial reporting is not intended to provide absolute assurance that a misstatement of our consolidated financial statements would be prevented or detected. Our growth and entry into new diagnostic tests, technologies and markets will place significant additional pressure on our system of internal control over financial reporting. Any failure to maintain an effective system of internal control over financial reporting could limit our ability to report our financial results accurately and timely or to detect and prevent fraud. Since we are a smaller reporting company, we are exempt from the requirement of having our internal controls over financial reporting audited by our independent registered public accountants, which means that material weaknesses or significant deficiencies in our internal controls that might be detected by an audit may not be detected and remedied.
We are subject to laws and regulations governing corruption, which may require us to develop, maintain, and implement costly compliance programs.
We must comply with a wide range of laws and regulations to prevent corruption, bribery, and other unethical business practices, including the FCPA, anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws in other countries. The creation and implementation of international business practices compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required.
Anti-bribery laws prohibit us, our employees, and some of our agents or representatives from offering or providing any personal benefit to covered government officials to influence their performance of their duties or induce them to serve interests other than the missions of the public organizations in which they serve. Certain commercial bribery rules also prohibit offering or providing any personal benefit to employees and representatives of commercial companies to influence performance of their duties or induce them to serve interests other than their employers. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with certain accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations. The anti-bribery provisions of the FCPA are enforced primarily by the United States Department of Justice. The SEC is involved with enforcement of the books and records provisions of the FCPA.
Table of Contents
Compliance with these anti-bribery laws is expensive and difficult, particularly in countries in which corruption is a recognized problem. In addition, the anti-bribery laws present particular challenges in the medical industry because in many countries including China, hospitals are state-owned or operated by the government, and doctors and other hospital employees are considered foreign government officials. Furthermore, in certain countries (China in particular), hospitals and clinics are permitted to sell pharmaceuticals to their patients and are primary or significant distributors of pharmaceuticals. Certain payments to hospitals in connection with clinical studies, procurement of pharmaceuticals and other work have been deemed to be improper payments to government officials that have led to vigorous anti-bribery law enforcement actions and heavy fines in multiple jurisdictions, particularly in the United States and China.
It is not always possible to identify and deter violations, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations.
In the medical industry, corrupt practices include, among others, offering or accepting kickbacks, bribes or other illegal gains or benefits by the hospitals and medical practitioners from manufacturers of pharmaceutical or other products, distributors or their third-party agents in connection with the prescription of certain pharmaceuticals or sale of products. If our employees, affiliates, distributors or third-party marketing firms violate these laws or otherwise engage in illegal practices with respect to their sales or marketing of our products or other activities involving our products, we could be required to pay damages or heavy fines by multiple jurisdictions where we operate, which could materially and adversely affect our financial condition and results of operations. There have been recent occurrences in which certain hospitals have denied access to sales representatives from pharmaceutical companies because the hospitals wanted to avoid the perception of corruption. If this attitude becomes widespread among our potential customers, our ability to promote our products to hospitals may be adversely affected.
If we and our subsidiaries further expand operations internationally, we will need to increase the scope of our compliance programs to address the risks relating to the potential for violations of the FCPA and other anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws and data protection laws. Our compliance programs will need to include policies addressing not only the FCPA, but also the provisions of a variety of anti-bribery and anti-corruption laws in multiple foreign jurisdictions, provisions relating to books and records that apply to us as a public company, and include effective training for our personnel throughout our organization. The creation and implementation of anti-corruption compliance programs is costly and such programs are difficult to enforce, particularly where reliance on third parties is required. Violation of the FCPA and other anti-corruption and data privacy laws can result in significant administrative and criminal penalties for us and our employees, including substantial fines, suspension or debarment from government contracting, prison sentences, or even the death penalty in extremely serious cases in certain countries. The SEC also may suspend or bar us from trading securities on U.S. exchanges for violation of the FCPA’s accounting provisions. Even if we are not ultimately punished by government authorities, the costs of investigation and review, distraction of our personnel, legal defense costs, and harm to our reputation could be substantial and could limit our profitability or our ability to develop or commercialize our product candidates. In addition, if any of our competitors are not subject to the FCPA, they may engage in practices that will lead to their receipt of preferential treatment from foreign hospitals and enable them to secure business from foreign hospitals in ways that are unavailable to us.
We may become subject to litigation, which could harm our stock price, business, results of operations and financial condition.
We may be subject to litigation from time to time. In the past, following periods of volatility in the market price of their stock, many companies have been the subjects of securities class action litigation. Any such litigation can result in substantial costs and diversion of management’s attention and resources and could harm our stock price, business, results of operations and financial condition. As a result of these factors, holders of our common stock might be unable to sell their shares at or above the price they paid for such shares.
We may undertake strategic acquisitions in the future, and difficulties integrating such acquisitions could damage our ability to achieve or sustain profitability.
We may acquire businesses or assets that complement or augment our existing business. If we acquire businesses with promising products or technologies, we may not be able to realize the benefit of acquiring such businesses if we are unable to move one or more products through preclinical and/or clinical development to regulatory approval and commercialization. Integrating any newly acquired businesses or technologies could be expensive and time-consuming, resulting in the diversion of resources from our current business. We may not be able to integrate any acquired business successfully, and we may not achieve revenues, specific net income or loss levels that justify the acquisition or that the acquisition will result in increased earnings, or reduced losses, for the combined company in any future period. Moreover, we may need to raise additional funds through public or private debt or equity financing to acquire any businesses, which would result in dilution for stockholders or the incurrence of indebtedness and may not be available on terms which would otherwise be acceptable to us. We may not be able to operate acquired businesses profitably or otherwise implement our growth strategy successfully.
Table of Contents
Our business could be adversely impacted by inflation.
Inflation rates, particularly in the United States, have increased recently. We may experience inflationary pressures, primarily in personnel costs, with certain laboratory supplies, from inventory costs related to certain raw materials, with essential vendors including audit fees and regulatory consultants, and from tariff policies and potential countermeasures. Prices for raw materials may fluctuate based on a number of factors beyond our control, including changes in supply and demand, general economic conditions, labor costs, fuel related delivery costs, competition, import duties, excises and other indirect taxes, currency exchange rates, and government regulation. The extent of any future impacts from inflation on our business and our results of operations will depend upon how long the elevated inflation levels persist and the extent to which the rate of inflation were to further increase, if at all, neither of which we are able to predict. If elevated levels of inflation were to persist or if the rate of inflation were to accelerate, the purchasing power of our cash and cash equivalents may be further diminished, our expenses could increase faster than anticipated and we may utilize our capital resources sooner than expected. Due to the highly competitive nature of the healthcare industry and the cost containment efforts of our customers and third-party payors, we may be unable to pass along cost increases for key components or raw materials through higher prices to our customers. Further, given the complexities of the reimbursement landscape in which we operate, our payers may be unwilling or unable to increase reimbursement rates to compensate for inflationary impacts. As such, the effects of inflation may adversely impact our results of operations, financial condition and cash flows.
Risks Related to Our Industry
Our operations as a clinical laboratory in the United States are subject to oversight by CMS under CLIA, as well as certain state agencies, and our operation of clinical laboratories in any foreign jurisdictions are subject to similar regulatory oversight. Any failure to maintain our CLIA or applicable state or international permits and licenses may affect our ability to commercialize our diagnostic tests.
We are subject to CLIA, a federal law regulating clinical laboratories that perform testing on specimens derived from humans for the purpose of providing information for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of disease. Our clinical laboratories must be certified under CLIA in order for us to perform testing on human specimens. CLIA is intended to ensure the quality and reliability of clinical laboratories in the United States by mandating specific standards in the areas of personnel qualifications, administration, and participation in proficiency testing, patient test management, quality control, quality assurance and inspections. We have a current certificate under CLIA to perform routine chemistry. To renew these certificates, our diagnostic laboratories are subject to survey and inspection every two years. Moreover, CLIA inspectors may make periodic inspections of our clinical laboratories outside of the renewal process.
The law also requires us to maintain a state laboratory license to conduct testing in the states in which our laboratories are located. State laws establish standards for day-to-day operation of a clinical laboratory, including the training and skills required of personnel and quality control. In addition, several states require that we hold licenses to test specimens from patients in those states. We do not have immediate plans to market our tests for commercial use in the EU and as a result, at this time we do not believe we are subject to EU or EU member state post-market regulations related to our tests.
If we were to lose our CLIA certification or a required state license for a laboratory, whether as a result of a revocation, suspension or limitation, we would no longer be able to offer our tests from the affected laboratory, which would limit our revenue and harm our business. If we were to lose our license in other states where we are required to hold licenses, we would not be able to test specimens from those states. If we perform testing on samples originating in a state where we require a license, but do not currently have one, we could be subject to fines, sanctions, and may be denied permits or licenses in the future.
We also maintain laboratory operations in Germany and could expand our laboratory operations to other foreign jurisdictions. Therefore, we are subject to laboratory quality regulations and accreditation standards in Germany, and will be subject to such regulations and standards in any other jurisdictions where we may operate. These requirements may vary by jurisdiction and differ from those in the United States, and may require us to implement additional compliance measures. If we fail to comply with any foreign jurisdiction’s applicable laboratory regulations and standards it could limit our revenue and harm or business and we could be subject to fines and other sanctions.
Table of Contents
While we believe our LDTs are within the scope of the FDA’s enforcement discretion policy, and therefore not required to obtain clearance or approval before commercialization, the FDA may attempt to regulate LDTs in the future, which could lead to LDT product development delays and increased costs.
The FDA has a long-standing policy of enforcement discretion for LDTs, meaning the tests are not subject to the FDA’s medical device regulations. In May 2024, the FDA published a final rule that proposed to phase out its enforcement discretion policy for LDTs, unless exempt, and proposed to amend the FDA’s regulations to make explicit that IVDs are medical devices under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, including when the manufacturer of the diagnostic product is a laboratory. This final rule would have subjected LDTs to the same regulatory requirements as medical devices, including, in some cases, requiring pre-market clearance or approval. However, in March 2025, following a legal challenge to the FDA’s authority to regulate LDTs, the Eastern District of Texas vacated the final rule. The FDA did not appeal the decision to vacate the final rule, and, in September 2025, the FDA formally revoked the final rule, retaining the enforcement discretion policy for LDTs.
As a result, we do not believe our LDT products are currently required to receive FDA clearance or approval prior to use or otherwise comply with the FDA’s medical device regulations. However, the FDA may try to regulate LDTs in the future, and we cannot be certain any future attempt to regulate LDTs will be vacated. Any future LDT rule could subject our current or future LDT products to additional regulatory requirements, including pre-market clearance or approval requirements, which could delay or halt commercialization of our tests, increase costs and materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
In addition, while we believe our LDTs are within the scope of the FDA’s enforcement discretion policy, the FDA may disagree and consider our LDTs to be IVDs. If so, our tests would be required to obtain FDA clearance or approval to be marketed in the United States, which could interrupt commercialization of our tests pending such clearance or approval. Obtaining FDA clearance or approval can be unpredictable, time-consuming, and costly, and would likely materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition, and results of operations.
We currently market certain IVDs for RUO that have not been cleared by the FDA in reliance on the regulatory exemption for IVDs intended for RUO, but if the FDA determines that our RUO tests do not meet the applicable requirements for exemption or have intended uses that are inconsistent with RUO tests, we may be required to suspend commercialization of such products until we can obtain the requisite FDA clearance and/or subject to FDA warning or untitled letters, seizure, injunction, fines, or other enforcement action.
Some of our tests are marketed for RUO, which allows us to sell such products without the premarket clearance that FDA requires for the marketing of traditional devices. An RUO product may not be marketed for clinical diagnostic use and must be labeled “For Research Use Only. Not for use in diagnostic procedures.” Products that are intended for research use only and are properly labeled as RUO are exempt from compliance with the FDA’s pre- and post-market requirements to which traditional devices are subject, including the requirement that the product be cleared or approved before commercialization and Quality System Regulation requirements. However, merely including the required RUO labeling will not necessarily exempt the device from the FDA's 510(k) clearance, premarket approval, or other requirements if the circumstances surrounding the distribution of the product indicate an objective intent to market the product for clinical diagnostic use.
According to the FDA guidance, circumstances indicating manufacturer intent to market an in vitro device for diagnostic use may include written or verbal marketing claims regarding a product's clinical efficacy or performance in clinical applications, instructions for clinical interpretation, clinical information, product names, or descriptors that claim or suggest that the IVD product may be used for any clinical diagnostic use, including a clinical investigation that is not exempt from the FDA’s investigational device exemption regulations. Other indications include a manufacturer's provision of technical support for clinical validation or clinical applications or solicitation of business from clinical laboratories that do not conduct research activities, all of which could be considered evidence of intended uses that conflict with RUO labeling.
In general, if (i) evidence shows that one or more of our IVDs are inappropriately labeled RUO (but marketed for clinical diagnostic use), such test(s) will not qualify for an IDE exemption and will be deemed misbranded under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act ("FDCA") . Device manufacturers found in violation of the FDCA may be subject to a wide range of enforcement action, including warning letters, seizure, injunction, criminal prosecution, monetary penalties, and others.
We believe that our promotional activities for our RUO products fall within the scope of the applicable premarket exemptions for RUO tests and the FDA’s enforcement discretion, as described in its relevant guidance. However, the FDA could disagree and require us to (i) stop promoting our RUO devices unless/until we obtain FDA clearance or approval (among other possible outcomes). Any adverse determination in relation to our marketing of current or future products for RUO will likely have a material adverse impact on our business.
Table of Contents
We will need to obtain FDA and other regulatory approvals for any IVDs that we may develop in order to market those IVD tests, and we may not be able to obtain those regulatory approvals in a timely manner or at all.
If we decide to develop IVDs, we will need to obtain regulatory clearance or approval to market each IVD test. This means that:
The IVDs cannot be sold until the CMS or the FDA, and corresponding foreign regulatory authorities approve or authorize the IVDs for medical use;
We will have to conduct expensive and time-consuming clinical trials of new diagnostic tests. The full cost of conducting and completing clinical trials necessary to obtain FDA clearance or approval of IVD tests or for gaining reimbursement from health insurance companies, health maintenance organizations, Medicare, and other third-party payers cannot be presently determined but could exceed our financial resources;
Data obtained from preclinical and clinical studies is susceptible to varying interpretations that could delay, limit or prevent regulatory agency clearances or approvals. Delays or denials of the regulatory clearances or approvals may be encountered as a result of changes in regulatory agency policy, regulations, or laws;
A diagnostic test that is cleared or approved for marketing may be subject to restrictions on use; and
The FDA can withdraw approval of an FDA regulated product if problems arise.
We have submitted a De Novo request with the FDA to obtain authorization for GraftAssureDx. While we believe our submission will be sufficient to support FDA authorization, we cannot be certain that the FDA will clear or approve GraftAssureDx for commercialization in the United States. If the FDA determines that our submission is insufficient, we may be asked to update our submission with new information, including, but not limited to, new safety and efficacy data generated from additional clinical trials. As a result, the need for additional information could be costly and significantly delay, or prevent, obtaining authorization to commercialize GraftAssureDx in the United States.
In addition, the ability of the FDA to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and statutory, regulatory, and policy changes 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. In addition, the U.S. government has shut down multiple times in the past (including the shutdown that started on October 1, 2025 and became the longest government shutdown in history based on data going back to fiscal 1977) and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, had to furlough employees and stop some of their activities. The effects of any prolonged government shutdown (including effects related to the shutdown that began October 2025) or a widespread freeze on federal funding could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, or cause other agencies that support the FDA to slow their work. Any such factors could have a material adverse effect on our business.
Further, presidential and congressional seat turnover may result in increased regulatory and economic uncertainty, including the spending priorities of the new U.S. presidential administration and Congress and what challenges budget reductions will present for us and our industry generally. For example, on January 20, 2025, President Trump announced an executive order establishing the “Department of Government Efficiency” to reform federal government processes and reduce expenditures. Changes in federal policy by the executive branch and regulatory agencies may occur over time through the new presidential administration’s and/or Congress’s policy and personnel changes, which could lead to changes involving our industry. However, the nature and timing of such potential changes remain highly uncertain. At this time, it is unclear whether and how any future changes or uncertainty surrounding future changes will adversely affect our business, but material adverse effects are possible.
Our ability to commercialize our products is dependent on availability and sufficiency of third-party payer coverage and our ability to ensure our tests remain reimbursed or attain reimbursement by Medicare, and the loss of, or a significant reduction in, reimbursement from Medicare or the CMS would have a material adverse impact on our business.
Our ability to successfully commercialize our current diagnostic tests and any product candidates we receive regulatory approval to market will depend, in significant part, on the extent to which appropriate reimbursement levels can be obtained for patients. Physicians will be hesitant to order a diagnostic test for a patient when they may be left with a large out-of-pocket fee through co-payments or co-insurance or unreimbursed balances. Third-party payers, including Medicare, Medicaid and private insurers, are increasingly challenging the prices charged for healthcare products and services. In addition, legislative proposals to reform health care or reduce government insurance programs may result in lower prices or the actual inability of prospective customers to purchase our tests. Furthermore, even if reimbursement is available, it may not be available at price levels sufficient for us to realize a positive return on our investment.
Table of Contents
Our primary near-term strategic market is organ transplant. We received a positive coverage decision from MolDx for GraftAssureCore (Kidney) in August of 2023, and it became commercially available for ordering in January 2024. In December 2024, we confirmed Medicare reimbursement for also monitoring certain high-risk patients, that is, those with newly developed donor-specific antibodies. However, we may not be able to ensure our tests remain reimbursed or attain reimbursement by Medicare for a variety of reasons, including changes in reimbursement practices, general policy shifts, or reductions in reimbursement amounts. We cannot predict whether Medicare reimbursements will continue at the same payment amount or with the same breadth of coverage in the future, if at all.
For diagnostics tests, Medicare or CMS reimbursement approval is critical. CMS relies on a network of MACs to make LCDs approving test for reimbursements. The MolDx Program was developed by Palmetto GBA (the previous MAC for California) to identify and establish coverage and reimbursement for molecular diagnostics tests. The program has developed guidelines for the level of evidence of efficacy required to be obtained through clinical trials. Palmetto, which contracted with CMS to administer the MolDx, issues LCDs that affect coverage, coding, and billing of many molecular tests and several MACs including the MAC for California, Noridian Healthcare Solutions, LLC, participate in the MolDX program. MACs also serve as the primary operational contact between the Medicare Fee-For-Service program, for paying Medicare claims, and approximately 1.5 million health care providers enrolled in the program. Delays in obtaining MAC approval, or any changes made related to any favorable LCDs, could have a material adverse impact on our business.
For example, on July 17, 2025, several MolDx MACs published a new “MolDX: Molecular Testing for Solid Organ Allograft Rejection” draft LCD (L38671), that, if adopted, would revise the existing foundational LCD, “MolDX: Molecular Testing for Solid Organ Allograft Rejection” (L38568 and L38629). In the draft LCD, surveillance use is explicitly contemplated and MolDx proposes capping the number of surveillance tests for kidney in year-one at four and subsequent years at two per year, and year-one tests for heart and lung would be capped at 12 tests per year. The comment period ran from July 17, 2025 through August 31, 2025 and an open meeting was held August 25, 2025.
If future reimbursement price levels are less than the current price, our revenues and our ability to achieve profitability could be impaired, and the market price of our common stock could decline. We may also not be able to maintain or increase the portion of our tests reimbursed by Medicare for a variety of other reasons, including changes in reimbursement practices and general policy shifts.
We cannot predict whether any current or future MAC will provide or continue to provide reimbursement for GraftAssureCore (Kidney) at the same payment amount or with the same breadth of coverage in the future, if at all. Additional changes in the MAC processing Medicare claims for GraftAssureCore (Kidney) could impact the coverage or payment amount for our tests and our ability to obtain Medicare coverage for any products we may launch in the future.
Any decision by CMS or its local contractors to reduce or deny coverage for our tests would have a significant adverse effect on our revenue and results of operations and ability to operate and access capital. Any such decision could also cause affected clinicians treating Medicare-covered patients to reduce or discontinue the use of our tests. Further, third‑party payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and payment rates and therefore their coverage and payment determinations may likewise be affected by any such decisions.
Even if a diagnostic test receives coverage and reimbursement from third-party payers, such coverage policies and reimbursement rates may change at any time, might not be adequate, or less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. We may need to conduct additional studies in order to demonstrate the cost-effectiveness of our diagnostic tests to the satisfaction of our target customers and their third-party payers. Such studies might require us to commit a significant amount of management time and financial and other resources. If we are unable to obtain and maintain sufficient third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement for a diagnostic test, its commercial success may be greatly hindered, and our financial condition and results of operations may be materially and adversely affected.
Clinical trial failures can occur at any stage of the testing and we may experience numerous unforeseen events during, or as a result of, the clinical trial process that could delay or prevent commercialization of our current or future diagnostic tests.
Clinical trial failures or delays can occur at any stage of the trials, and may be directly or indirectly caused by a variety of factors, including but not limited to:
Delays in securing clinical investigators or trial sites for our clinical trials;
Delays in obtaining Institutional Review Board and other regulatory approvals to commence a clinical trial;
Slower than anticipated rates of patient recruitment and enrollment, or failing to reach the targeted number of patients due to competition for patients from other trials;
Table of Contents
Limited or no availability of coverage, reimbursement and adequate payment from health maintenance organizations and other third-party payers for the use of our diagnostic test candidates in our clinical trials;
Negative or inconclusive results from clinical trials;
Approval and introduction of new diagnostic tests or changes in standards of practice or regulatory guidance that render our clinical trial endpoints or the targeting of our proposed indications obsolete;
Inability to monitor patients adequately during or after treatment or problems with investigator or patient compliance with the trial protocols;
Inability to replicate in large controlled studies safety and efficacy data obtained from a limited number of patients in uncontrolled trials; and
Inability or unwillingness of medical investigators to follow our clinical protocols.
Any of the foregoing factors as well as other unforeseen events could delay or prevent commercialization of our current or future diagnostic tests and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.
Changes in healthcare laws and policies may have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
We cannot predict whether future healthcare initiatives will be implemented at the federal or state level, or how any future legislation or regulation may affect us. The United States government and state legislatures have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and coverage. Adoption of government controls and measures, and tightening of restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could exclude or limit one or more of our diagnostic tests from coverage.
For instance, the payment reductions imposed by healthcare reform legislation known as the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), the expansion of the federal and state governments’ role in the U.S. healthcare industry, and the changes to the reimbursement amounts paid by payers for our tests and future tests and products may reduce our profits and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and cash flows. Notably, Congress enacted legislation in 2017 that eliminated the ACA’s “individual mandate,” a provision that required individuals to buy health insurance or pay a fine, which has impacted the number of covered lives participating in exchange plans. In June 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a judicial challenge to the ACA brought by several states without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. We cannot be certain that there will not be further legislative efforts or judicial challenges in the future.
The Trump administration may also significantly alter the current regulatory framework and the healthcare industry, including any further challenges of certain ACA provisions. These changes could have an adverse and material impact on our operations. For example, the staff of the Department of Government Efficiency (the “DOGE”), an executive administrative agency created by the second Trump Administration, have been provided access to key payment and contracting systems at CMS to look for opportunities for improving efficiency and to identify fraud and ineffective use of resources. While we cannot predict other actions of the DOGE, there is a possibility that additional changes will be made to CMS spending, which could ultimately affect our financial condition and results of operations.
In addition, the Trump administration previously issued a memorandum instructing U.S. executive agencies to prepare for reductions in workforce at governmental agencies, which included the FDA. If the current administration takes further actions that substantially reduces FDA’s workforce, in particular, at the Center for Devices and Radiological Health, we may face significant delay in obtaining approval, if required, and subsequently marketing future product candidates.
Further, on July 4, 2025, President Trump signed the One Big Beautiful Bill Act into law which, among other things, is expected to reduce funding to federal healthcare programs and impose additional requirements to be eligible for healthcare, changes that could lead to decreased utilization of Medicare and Medicaid reimbursed items, and could ultimately affect our financial condition and results of operations.
Table of Contents
Additionally, the Protecting Access to Medicare Act (“PAMA”) significantly altered the payment methodology under the Clinical Laboratory Fee Schedule that determines Medicare coverage for laboratory tests. Under PAMA (as amended by the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 and the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, respectively) and its implementing regulations, clinical laboratories must report to the CMS, the administrator of CLIA, private payer rates for clinical diagnostic laboratory tests. Laboratories that fail to timely report the required payment information may be subject to substantial civil money penalties. Medicare payments for clinical diagnostic laboratory tests are paid based upon these reported private payer rates. For certain clinical diagnostic laboratory tests that are not designated as advanced diagnostic laboratory tests, initial payment rates will be assigned by the cross-walk or gap-fill methodology. For laboratory tests that are designated as new advanced diagnostic laboratory tests, initial payment rates will be based on the actual list charge for the laboratory test.
If future reimbursement price levels are less than the current price, our revenues and our ability to achieve profitability could be impaired, and the market price of our common stock could decline. Additionally, any decision by CMS or its local contractors to reduce or deny coverage for our tests would have a significant adverse effect on our revenue and results of operations and ability to operate and raise capital. Any such decision could also cause affected clinicians treating Medicare-covered patients to reduce or discontinue the use of our tests.
Because of certain Medicare billing policies, we may not receive complete reimbursement for tests provided to Medicare patients.
Medicare has coverage policies that can be national or regional in scope. Coverage means that the test or assay is approved as a benefit for Medicare beneficiaries. If there is no coverage, neither the supplier nor any other party, such as a diagnostic laboratory, may receive reimbursement from Medicare for the service. Regional policies are directed by Medicare’s regional MACs. Reimbursement for our diagnostic testing may be negatively impacted by MAC policies and we may not receive complete reimbursement for tests provided to Medicare patients due to such policies.
Long payment cycles of Medicare, Medicaid and other third-party payers, or other payment delays, could hurt our cash flows and increase our need for working capital.
Medicare and Medicaid have complex billing and documentation requirements that we will have to satisfy in order to receive payment. Failure to comply with these requirements and other laws applicable to billing may result in, among other things, non-payment, refunds, exclusion from government healthcare programs, and civil or criminal liabilities, any of which may have a material adverse effect on our revenues and earnings. Similarly, the failure of private health insurers or other private third-party payers to properly process our payment claims in a timely manner could delay our receipt of payment for our diagnostic tests and services, which may have a material adverse effect on our cash flows.
Private health insurance company policies may deny coverage or limit reimbursement for the performance of our diagnostic tests.
Patients who are not covered by Medicare will generally rely on health insurance provided by private health insurance companies. However, private third-party payers often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and payment rates. If we are considered a “non-contracted provider” by a third-party payer, that payer may not reimburse patients for diagnostic tests performed by us, or doctors within the payer’s network of covered physicians may not use our services to perform diagnostic tests for their patients. As a result, we may need to enter into contracts with health insurance companies or other private payers to provide diagnostic tests to their insured patients at specified rates of reimbursement which may be lower than the rates we might otherwise collect.
We will be required to comply with federal and state laws governing the privacy of health information, and any failure to comply with these laws could result in material criminal and civil penalties.
HIPAA sets forth security regulations that establish administrative, physical and technical standards for maintaining the confidentiality, integrity and availability of PHI in electronic form. We also may be required to comply with state laws that are more stringent than HIPAA or that provide individuals with greater rights with respect to the privacy or security of, and access to, their health care records. HITECH established certain health information security breach notification obligations that require covered entities to notify each individual whose PHI is breached.
Table of Contents
We may incur significant compliance costs related to HIPAA and HITECH privacy regulations and varying state privacy regulations and varying state privacy and security laws. Given the complexity of HIPAA and HITECH and their overlap with state privacy and security laws, and the fact that these laws are rapidly evolving and are subject to changing and potentially conflicting interpretation, our ability to comply with HIPAA, HITECH and state privacy requirements is uncertain and the costs of compliance are significant. The costs of complying with any changes to the HIPAA, HITECH and state privacy restrictions may have a negative impact on our operations. Noncompliance could subject us to criminal penalties, civil sanctions and significant monetary penalties as well as reputational damage.
We are subject to numerous federal and state statutes and regulations pertaining to our business and are subject to government oversight and scrutiny for our compliance with such laws. Laboratory and health care regulatory compliance efforts are expensive and time-consuming, and failure to maintain compliance with applicable laws could result in enforcement action which could be detrimental to our business.
We are subject to extensive and frequently changing federal and state laws governing various aspects of our business, including those related to reimbursements by third-party payers for any of our commercialized diagnostic tests. We are subject to ongoing compliance with laws addressing our laboratory licensure and certification at the federal and state level; advertising and promotion (including laws enforced by the FDA and Federal Trade Commission); and laws intended to prevent fraud, waste, and abuse in healthcare programs (including, among others, the Anti-Kickback Statute, False Claims Act, EKRA, the Stark Law, and applicable state law equivalents).
These laws and regulations are complex and are subject to interpretation by the courts and by government agencies. If one or more such agencies alleges that we may be in violation of any of these requirements, regardless of the outcome, it could damage our reputation and adversely affect important business relationships with third parties. Any action brought against us for violation of these or other laws or regulations, even if we successfully defend against it, could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws and regulations, we may be subject to any applicable penalty associated with the violation, including civil and criminal penalties, damages and fines, and in some circumstances we could be required to refund payments received by us from payers, or even be excluded from participation in healthcare programs. Any of the foregoing consequences could seriously harm our business and our financial results.
We plan to adopt policies and procedures designed to comply with applicable laws and regulations. Developing a compliance infrastructure is costly and time-consuming, and even a well-designed and implemented compliance program cannot necessarily prevent all violations of relevant laws. We may be subject to enforcement action based on the actions or omissions of employees or contractors, including our anticipated sales force.
Tariff policies and potential countermeasures could increase our costs and disrupt our global supply chain, which could negatively impact the results of our operations.
President Trump has increased, and has indicated his willingness to continue to increase, the use of tariffs by the U.S. to accomplish certain U.S. policy goals. Such tariffs and any countermeasures could increase the cost of raw materials and components necessary for our operations, disrupt our global supply chain and create additional operational challenges. Further, it is possible that government policy changes and related uncertainty about policy changes could increase market volatility. Because of these dynamics, we cannot predict the impact of any future changes to the U.S.’s or other countries’ trading relationships or the impact of new laws or regulations adopted by the U.S. or other countries on our business. Such changes in tariffs and trade regulations could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition, results of operations and cash flows.
Risks Related to Intellectual Property
We rely on patents and trade secrets, and our financial success will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain commercially valuable patent claims, protect our intellectual property rights and operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others.
We rely primarily on patents and contractual obligations with employees and third parties to protect our proprietary rights. We have sought, and intend to continue to seek, appropriate patent protection for important and strategic components of our proprietary technologies by filing patent applications in the United States and certain foreign countries. We may also use license agreements both to access technologies developed by other companies and universities and to convey certain intellectual property rights to others. Our financial success will depend, in part, on our ability to obtain commercially valuable patent claims, protect our intellectual property rights and operate without infringing upon the proprietary rights of others.
Table of Contents
The patent positions of biotechnology companies, including our patent position, involve complex legal and factual questions, and, therefore, the issuance, scope, validity and enforceability of any patent claims that we may obtain cannot be predicted with certainty. Patents, if issued, may be challenged, deemed unenforceable, invalidated, or circumvented. A third-party may submit prior art, or we may become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review, supplemental examination, or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of our licensors or development partners. The costs of defending or enforcing our proprietary rights in these proceedings can be substantial, and the outcome can be uncertain. An adverse determination in any such submission or proceeding could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, or reduce our ability to manufacture or commercialize products. Furthermore, if the scope or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could discourage companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize current or future products. The ownership of our proprietary rights could also be challenged.
Moreover, the issuance of a patent, while presumed valid and enforceable, is not conclusive as to its validity or its enforceability and it may not provide us with adequate proprietary protection or competitive advantages against competitors with similar products. Competitors may also be able to design around our patents. Other parties may develop and obtain patent protection for more effective technologies, designs or methods.
We may not be able to obtain patent protection for our diagnostic tests if our pending U.S. patent applications are found to be directed to unpatentable subject matter.
The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years, either narrowing the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances or weakening the rights of patent owners in certain situations. For example, recent cases have held that diagnostic methods merely reciting a correlation between a naturally occurring event and a diagnostic outcome associated with that event is not patentable subject matter. If our pending U.S. patent applications are found to be directed to unpatentable subject matter by the USPTO, or any patents issuing from our pending patent applications are invalidated based on these decisions, we may be unable to prevent competitors from using the biomarkers or other subject matter disclosed in the patent applications to develop similar diagnostic tests that would compete with our tests. Additionally, there have been recent proposals for additional changes to the patent laws of the United States and other countries that, if adopted, could impact our ability to enforce our proprietary technology. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.
Changes to the patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our diagnostic tests.
Our success is heavily dependent on intellectual property, particularly patents. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the biopharmaceutical industry involves both technological and legal complexity and is costly, time-consuming and inherently uncertain. Patent reform legislation in the United States and other countries, including the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (“Leahy-Smith Act”), signed into law in September 2011, could increase those uncertainties and costs. The Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to U.S. patent law. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. In addition, the Leahy-Smith Act has transformed the U.S. patent system into a “first to file” system, which became effective in March 2013. The Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation may make it more difficult to obtain patent protection for our inventions and increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our or our collaboration partners’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or our collaboration partners’ issued patents, all of which could harm our business, results of operations and financial condition.
Table of Contents
Other companies or organizations may challenge our patent rights or may assert patent rights that prevent us from developing and commercializing our diagnostic tests.
Any patent applications that we file and any patents that we hold or later obtain could be challenged by third parties and declared invalid or infringing of third-party claims. A patent interference proceeding may be instituted with the USPTO when more than one person files a patent application covering the same technology, or if someone wishes to challenge the validity of an issued patent filed before March 16, 2013. At the completion of the interference proceeding, the USPTO will determine which competing applicant is entitled to the patent, or whether an issued patent is valid. Patent interference proceedings are complex, highly contested legal proceedings, and the USPTO’s decision is subject to appeal. This means that if an interference proceeding arises with respect to any of our patent applications, we may experience significant expenses and delay in obtaining a patent, and if the outcome of the proceeding is unfavorable to us, the patent could be issued to a competitor rather than to us. In addition to interference proceedings, the USPTO can review issued patents at the request of a third party seeking to have the patent invalidated. An inter partes review proceeding allows third parties to challenge the validity of an issued patent where there is a reasonable likelihood of invalidity. This means that patents owned or licensed by us may be subject to administrative review and may be lost if the outcome of the review is unfavorable to us.
Post Grant Review under the Leahy-Smith Act makes available opposition-like proceedings in the United States. As with the USPTO interference proceedings, Post Grant Review proceedings will be very expensive to contest and can result in significant delays in obtaining patent protection or can result in a denial of a patent application. Further, a derivation proceeding may be instituted by the USPTO or an inventor alleging that a patent or application was derived from the work of another inventor.
Oppositions to the issuance of patents may be filed under European patent law and the patent laws of certain other countries. As with the USPTO interference proceedings, these foreign proceedings can be very expensive to contest and can result in significant delays in obtaining a patent or can result in a denial of a patent application.
The enforcement of patent rights often requires litigation against third party infringers, and such litigation can be costly to pursue. Even if we succeed in having new patents issued or in defending any challenge to issued patents, our patents may not be comprehensive enough to provide us with meaningful patent protection against our competitors.
If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, the value of our technology could be materially adversely affected, and our business would be harmed.
In addition to patents, we rely on trade secrets, know-how, and continuing technological advancement to maintain our competitive position. The molecular diagnostics that we are developing use gene expression classifiers or algorithms, which are mathematical models that weight the biomarkers to produce a score. We will treat the mathematical models as trade secrets. We have also entered into intellectual property, invention, and non-disclosure agreements with our employees, and it is our practice to enter into confidentiality agreements with our consultants. These measures, however, may not prevent the unauthorized disclosure or use of our trade secrets and know-how, or that others may not independently develop similar trade secrets and know-how or obtain access to our trade secrets, know-how, or proprietary technology.
We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful.
Competitors may infringe our patents, trademarks, copyrights or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In any patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid or unenforceable, in whole or in part, and that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue. Even if the validity of such patents is upheld, the court may construe the patent’s claims narrowly or decide that we do not have the right to stop the other party from using the invention at issue on the grounds that our patent claims do not cover the invention. An adverse outcome in litigation or proceeding involving our patents could limit our ability to assert our patents against those parties or other competitors, and may curtail or preclude our ability to exclude third parties from making and selling similar or competitive products. Any of these occurrences could adversely affect our competitive business position, business prospects and financial condition. Similarly, if we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question, in which case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks.
Table of Contents
Even if we establish infringement, the court may decide not to grant an injunction against further infringing activity and instead award only monetary damages, which may or may not be an adequate remedy. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during litigation. There could also be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a material adverse effect on the price of shares of our common stock. Moreover, we may not have sufficient financial or other resources to file and pursue such infringement claims, which typically last for years before they are concluded. Even if we ultimately prevail in such claims, the monetary cost of such litigation and the diversion of the attention of our management and scientific personnel could outweigh any benefit we receive as a result of the proceedings.
We may not be able to enforce our intellectual property rights throughout the world.
Filing, prosecuting and defending patents, if issued, on our diagnostic test candidate in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive. The requirements for patentability may differ in certain countries, particularly in developing countries. Competitors may use our 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 may obtain patent protection, but where patent enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our diagnostic tests in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued or licensed patents or where any future patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing with us.
Moreover, our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in foreign intellectual property laws. Additionally, laws of some countries outside of the United States and Europe do not afford intellectual property protection to the same extent as the laws of the United States and Europe. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in certain foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries, including India, China and certain developing countries, do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights. This could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or the misappropriation of our other intellectual property rights. For example, many foreign countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner must grant licenses to third parties. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in certain countries outside the United States and Europe. Competitors may use our 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 have patent protection, if our ability to enforce our patents to stop infringing activities is inadequate. These products may compete with our diagnostic test, and our patents, if issued, or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing.
Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions, whether or not successful, could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and resources from other aspects of our business. Furthermore, while we intend to protect our intellectual property rights in major markets for our diagnostic test, we cannot ensure that we will be able to initiate or maintain similar efforts in all jurisdictions in which we may wish to market our diagnostic tests. Accordingly, our efforts to protect our intellectual property rights in such countries may be inadequate.
If we are sued for infringing intellectual property rights of third parties, such litigation could be costly and time consuming and could prevent or delay us from developing or commercializing our diagnostic tests.
There is a substantial amount of intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, and we may become party to, or threatened with, litigation or other adversarial proceedings regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current or future diagnostic test, including interference proceedings before the USPTO, misappropriation claims, or other allegations. The outcome of intellectual property litigation is subject to uncertainties that cannot be adequately quantified in advance. For example, the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries have 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. If we were sued for patent infringement, we would need to demonstrate that our diagnostic tests or methods either do not infringe the patent claims of the relevant patent or that the patent claims are invalid or unenforceable, and we may not be able to do this. Proving invalidity is difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents.
Table of Contents
We may not have identified all patents, published applications or published literature that affect our business either by blocking our ability to commercialize our products or potential products, by preventing the patentability of one or more aspects of our products or potential products to us or our licensors, or by covering the same or similar technologies that may affect our ability to market our products and potential products. For example, we (or the licensor of a product or potential product to it) may not have conducted a patent clearance search sufficient to identify potentially obstructing third party patent rights. Moreover, patent applications in the United States are maintained in confidence for up to 18 months after their filing. In some cases, however, patent applications remain confidential in the USPTO, for the entire time prior to issuance as a U.S. patent. Patent applications filed in countries outside of the United States are not typically published until at least 18 months from their first filing date. Similarly, publication of discoveries in scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries. We cannot be certain that we or our licensors were the first to invent, or the first to file, patent applications covering our products. We also may not know if our competitors filed patent applications for technology covered by our pending applications or if we were the first to invent the technology that is the subject of our patent applications. Competitors may have filed patent applications or received patents and may obtain additional patents and proprietary rights that block or compete with our patents.
If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we may have to pay monetary damages, lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, or be forced to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing diagnostic test. Alternatively, we may be required to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the infringing technology and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing the infringing diagnostic test. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our diagnostic tests or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business.
Failure to adequately protect, or disputes relating to, trademarks or patents, could harm our business.
We cannot be certain that the legal steps we are taking are sufficient to protect our trademark and patent rights or that, notwithstanding legal protection, others will not infringe or misappropriate our intellectual property rights. In addition, we could come into conflict with third parties over trademark or patent rights, which could result in disruptive and expensive litigation. Challenges to our trademarks or patents could result in significant costs related to the prosecution or defense of the registrations of our trademarks or patents or rebranding if we need to abandon or modify a trademark or patent.
Even if we have or obtain trademarks and patents covering our products, we may still be prevented from making, using, selling, offering for sale, or importing our products or technologies because of the trademark and patent rights of others. Others may have filed, and in the future may file, trademark or patent applications covering technologies or products that are similar or identical to ours. These filings could materially affect our ability to develop or sell our products. Because trademark and patent applications can take many years to issue and are not published for a period of time after filing, there may be currently pending applications unknown to us that may later result in issued trademarks or patents that our products or technologies may infringe. These trademark and patent applications may have priority over trademark and patent applications filed by us.
Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our diagnostic tests for an adequate amount of time.
Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new diagnostic tests, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. We expect to seek extensions of patent terms in the United States and, if available, in other countries where we are prosecuting patents. In the United States, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent, which is limited to the approved indication or any additional indications approved during the period of extension. However, the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authorities in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. If this occurs, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and pre-clinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case.
Table of Contents
Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedures and other requirements, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated in case of non-compliance with these requirements.
Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to the relevant patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. The relevant patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other provisions during the patent application process. In many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which failure to comply with the relevant requirements can result in the abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. In such an event, our competitors might be able to use our technologies and know-how which could have a material adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operation.
Risks Related to Our Common Stock
The trading price of our common stock is highly volatile, and purchasers of our common stock could incur substantial losses.
The market price of our common stock has been and is likely to continue to be highly volatile and could fluctuate widely in response to various factors, many of which are beyond our control, including the following:
technological innovations or new products and services by us or by our competitors, including announcements by us or our competitors of significant contracts, acquisitions, strategic partnerships or capital commitments;
additions or departures of key personnel;
changes in expectations as to our future financial performance;
sales of our common stock;
our ability to execute our business plan;
loss of any strategic relationship;
industry developments;
changes in financial estimates by any securities analysts who follow our common stock, our failure to meet these estimates or failure of those analysts to initiate or maintain coverage of our common stock;
general market conditions, including market volatility and inflation;
fluctuations in stock market prices and trading volumes of similar companies;
economic, political and other external factors;
period-to-period fluctuations in our financial results;
applicable regulatory developments in the United States and foreign countries, both generally or specific to us and our products; and
intellectual property, product liability or other litigation against us.
Although publicly traded securities are subject to price and volume fluctuations, it is likely that our common stock will experience these fluctuations to a greater degree than the securities of more established and better capitalized organizations.
Because we do not pay dividends, our stock may not be a suitable investment for anyone who needs to earn dividend income.
We do not pay cash dividends on our common stock. For the foreseeable future we anticipate that any earnings generated in our business will be used to finance the growth of our business and will not be paid out as dividends to our shareholders. Consequently, shareholders’ ability to achieve a return on their investment will depend on appreciation in the price of our common stock.
Table of Contents
Securities analysts may not initiate coverage or continue to cover our common stock, and this may have a negative impact on the market price of our shares.
The market for our common stock will depend, in part, on the research and reports that securities analysts publish about our business and our common stock. We do not have any control over these analysts. Certain securities analysts cover our shares and they could issue reports or recommendations that are unfavorable to the price of our shares, and they could downgrade a previously favorable report or recommendation, and in either case our share price could decline as a result of the report. If one or more of these analysts ceases to cover our shares or fails to publish regular reports on our business, we could lose visibility in the financial markets, which could cause our share price or trading volume to decline.
You may experience dilution of your ownership interests if we issue additional shares of common stock or preferred stock.
In the future, we may issue our authorized but previously unissued equity securities, resulting in the dilution of the ownership interests of our present shareholders. We are currently authorized to issue an aggregate of 235,000,000 shares of capital stock consisting of 230,000,000 shares of common stock and 5,000,000 “blank check” shares of preferred stock. As of December 31, 2025, there were 28,682,844 shares of common stock outstanding, 760,866 shares of common stock reserved for issuance upon the exercise of warrants, 3,412,814 shares of common stock reserved for issuance upon the exercise of pre-funded warrants, 2,251,000 shares of common stock reserved for issuance upon the exercise of options under our e quity incentive plan, and 852,000 shares of common stock reserved for issuance upon the vesting of restricted stock units under our e quity incentive plan. No shares of preferred stock are presently outstanding.
We may issue additional common stock or other securities that are convertible into or exercisable for common stock in order to raise additional capital, or in connection with hiring or retaining employees, directors, or consultants, or in connection with future acquisitions of licenses to technology or diagnostic tests in connection with future business acquisitions, or for other business purposes. The future issuance of any such additional common stock or other securities may create downward pressure on the trading price of our common stock.
We may also issue preferred stock having rights, preferences, and privileges senior to the rights of our common stock with respect to dividends, rights to share in distributions of our assets if we liquidate our company, or voting rights. Any preferred stock may also be convertible into common stock on terms that would be dilutive to holders of common stock.
We are a “smaller reporting company” under the SEC’s disclosure rules and have elected to comply with the reduced disclosure requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies.
As a smaller reporting company, we have elected to adopt the accommodations for scaled-back disclosure in our SEC filings, resulting in less information about our Company being available compared to other public companies. We are also a non-accelerated filer and are not required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002. Our internal controls over financial reporting will not receive the level of review provided by the process relating to the auditor attestation included in annual reports of issuers that are subject to these requirements.
We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we are not required to comply with more robust disclosure or the auditor attestation requirements. If investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and trading prices may be negatively affected.
Failure to establish and maintain adequate finance infrastructure and accounting systems and controls could impair our ability to comply with the financial reporting and internal controls requirements for publicly traded companies.
As a public company, we operate in a demanding regulatory environment, which requires us to comply with the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 and related rules and regulations, expanded disclosure requirements, accelerated reporting requirements and complex accounting rules. Responsibilities imposed by the Sarbanes-Oxley Act include establishing and maintaining corporate oversight and adequate internal control over financial reporting and disclosure controls and procedures. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to produce reliable financial reports and are important to help prevent financial fraud.
In particular, our compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act has required and will continue to require that we incur substantial accounting-related expenses and expend significant management efforts. Our testing, or the testing by our independent registered public accounting firm, may reveal deficiencies in our internal controls that we would be required to remediate in a timely manner. If we are not able to comply with the requirements of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the SEC, the Nasdaq Stock Market or other regulatory authorities, which would require additional financial and management resources and could adversely affect the market price of our securities. Furthermore, if we cannot provide reliable financial reports or prevent fraud, our business and results of operations would likely be materially adversely affected.
Table of Contents
Failure to meet the continued listing requirements of The Nasdaq Capital Market could result in a delisting of our common stock.
Our shares of common stock are currently listed for trading on The Nasdaq Capital Market under the symbol “IMDX.” If we fail to satisfy the continued listing requirements of The Nasdaq Stock Market, LLC (“Nasdaq”), such as the corporate governance requirements, the shareholder’s equity requirement or the minimum closing bid price requirement, Nasdaq may take steps to delist our common stock. Such a delisting or even notification of failure to comply with such requirements would likely have a negative effect on the price of our common stock and would impair our shareholders’ ability to sell or purchase our common stock when our shareholders wish to do so. In the event of a delisting, we expect that we would take actions to restore our compliance with Nasdaq s listing requirements, but we can provide no assurance that any such action taken by us would allow our common stock to become listed again, stabilize the market price or improve the liquidity of our common stock, prevent our common stock from dropping below the Nasdaq minimum bid price requirement or prevent future noncompliance with Nasdaq’s listing requirements.
