Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. You should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below, together with all of the other information contained in or incorporated by reference into this Quarterly Report, including our unaudited condensed financial statements and the related notes appearing at the end of this Quarterly Report and the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations,” and the information in our Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025 (the “2025 Annual Report”) before deciding to invest in our common stock. This Quarterly Report also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of a number of factors. See the section titled “Special Note Regarding Forward-Looking Statements.” Risks Related to Limited Operating History, Financial Position and Capital Requirements We have a limited operating history and have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. Pharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company with a limited operating history, which may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business to date and assess our future viability. Since our inception in December 2019, we have focused primarily on organizing and staffing our company, business planning, establishing our intellectual property portfolio, raising capital, developing our proprietary and structure-based drug discovery platform, identifying and developing our product candidates, conducting research and preclinical studies, including IND-enabling studies, initiating and conducting clinical trials, and providing general and administrative support for these operations. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our Native Complex Platform® is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed in clinical development or commercially. Other than SEP-631 and SEP-479, all of our current product candidates and development programs are in preclinical development or in the drug discovery stages. Accordingly, we have not yet successfully completed any advanced clinical trials, demonstrated an ability to successfully obtain regulatory approvals, manufactured commercial-scale product, or arranged for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conducted sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing pharmaceutical products. We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date, and we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred significant losses since our inception, with the exception of the year ended December 31, 2023, and negative cash flows from operating activities and capital expenditures and expect to continue to incur significant and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years. If our product candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any significant revenue. For the six months ended June 30, 2026 and 2025, our net losses were $21.7 million and $46.3 million, respectively. As of June 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $188.9 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. All of our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources before we would be able to apply for or receive marketing approvals and begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect that our expenses will increase substantially as we continue our development of, seek marketing approval for and potentially commercialize any of our product candidates, recruit and maintain key personnel and seek to identify, assess, acquire, in-license or develop additional product candidates. Even if we succeed in developing and obtaining marketing approval for one or more of our product candidates, we may never generate revenue that is significant enough to achieve profitability. If we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis and we will continue to incur substantial research and development and other expenditures to develop and market additional product candidates. Our failure to become and remain profitable could decrease the value of our common stock and impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. 34 We will require substantial additional funding in order to finance our operations. If we are unable to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, or at all, we may be forced to delay, reduce, or terminate certain of our research and product development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations. The development of pharmaceutical product candidates, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, capital-intensive and uncertain process that takes years to complete. Our operations have consumed substantial amounts of cash since inception, and we expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we identify, continue the research and development of, initiate and conduct clinical trials of, and seek regulatory approval for any product candidates we may identify. In addition, if we obtain regulatory approval for any product candidates we may identify, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution to the extent that such sales, marketing, manufacturing, and distribution are not the responsibility of a collaborator. Because the outcome of any clinical trial or preclinical study is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amount of capital necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Other unanticipated costs may also arise. Furthermore, we expect to incur additional costs associated with operating as a public company. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on acceptable terms, we would be forced to delay, reduce, or eliminate our research and product development programs, future commercialization efforts or other operations. As of June 30, 2026, we had $516.5 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities. We expect that our cash, cash equivalents, and marketable securities will enable us to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements at least into 2029. However, we have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and our operating plan may change as a result of factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek funding sooner than planned. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including: •the timing and progress of research and development, preclinical and clinical development activities; •the number, scope and duration of clinical trials required for regulatory approval of our product candidates; •the costs, timing, and outcome of regulatory review of any of our product candidates in any jurisdictions in which we or our current or any future collaborators may seek approval for our product candidates; •the costs of manufacturing clinical and commercial supplies of our product candidates; •the costs and timing of future commercialization activities, including product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution, for any of our product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval; •the costs of preparing, filing and prosecuting our patent applications, maintaining and enforcing our patents and other intellectual property rights and defending intellectual property-related claims; •our ability to maintain existing, and establish new, strategic collaborations, licensing or other arrangements, and the financial terms of any such agreements, including the timing and amount of any future milestone, royalty or other payments due under any such agreement; •the costs of manufacturing clinical and commercial supplies of our product candidates; •the costs and timing of future commercialization activities, including product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution, for any of our product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval; •the costs of preparing, filing and prosecuting our patent applications, maintaining and enforcing our patents and other intellectual property rights and defending intellectual property-related claims; •our ability to maintain existing, and establish new, strategic collaborations, licensing or other arrangements, and the financial terms of any such agreements, including the timing and amount of any future milestone, royalty or other payments due under any such agreement; •our ability to establish and maintain collaboration and license agreements on favorable terms, if at all; •the extent to which we acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies; •any product liability or other lawsuits related to our product candidates; •our implementation of various computerized informational systems and efforts to enhance operational systems; •expenses incurred to attract, hire and retain skilled personnel; •the costs of operating as a public company; •our ability to establish a commercially viable pricing structure and obtain approval for coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party and government payors; 35 •the extent to which we acquire or invest in businesses, products, and technologies; •the effect of competing technological and market developments; and •the impact of global economic uncertainty and geopolitical tensions, which may exacerbate the magnitude of the factors discussed above. We expect our expenses to continue to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we identify, continue the research and development of, initiate preclinical studies and clinical trials of, and seek marketing approval for, product candidates, and we may never generate the necessary data or results required to obtain regulatory approval and achieve product sales. In addition, our product candidates, if approved, may not achieve commercial success. Our commercial revenues, if any, will be derived from sales of products that we do not expect to be commercially available for many years, if at all. Accordingly, we will need to continue to rely on additional financing to achieve our business objectives. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a common stockholder. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures, declaring dividends, and possibly other restrictions. Any additional fundraising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates. We have no committed sources of additional capital and, if we are unable to raise additional capital in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, we may have to significantly delay, scale back or discontinue the development or commercialization of our product candidates or other research and development initiatives. Without sufficient funding, our license agreements and any future collaboration agreements may also be terminated if we are unable to meet the payment or other obligations under such agreements. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce, or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. Additionally, if we raise funds through additional collaborations, strategic alliances, or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs, or product candidates we develop, or we may have to grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us and/or that may reduce the value of our common stock. We have never generated revenue from product sales and may never be profitable. Our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve profitability depends on our ability, alone or with collaborative partners, to successfully complete the development of, obtain the regulatory approvals necessary to commercialize and eventually commercialize, product candidates we may identify for development. We may not generate revenues from product sales for many years, if ever. Our ability to generate future revenues from product sales depends heavily on our or our collaborators’ ability to successfully: •identify product candidates and successfully complete research and development of any product candidates we may identify; •advance our product candidates through preclinical and clinical development; •seek and obtain regulatory approvals for any product candidates for which we successfully complete clinical trials; •launch and commercialize any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval by establishing a sales force, marketing and distribution infrastructure, or alternatively, collaborating with a commercialization partner; •qualify for adequate coverage and reimbursement by government and third-party payors for any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval; •establish and maintain supply and manufacturing relationships with third parties that can provide adequate, in both amount and quality, products and services to support clinical development and the market demand for any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval; •develop, maintain and enhance a sustainable, scalable, reproducible and transferable manufacturing process for the product candidates we may develop; •address competing technological and market developments; •negotiate favorable terms in any collaboration, licensing or other arrangements into which we may enter and perform our obligations in such collaborations; •receive market acceptance by physicians, patients, healthcare payors, and others in the medical community; •receive coverage and adequate reimbursement by healthcare payors; 36 •maintain, protect, enforce, defend and expand our portfolio of intellectual property and other proprietary rights, including patents, trade secrets and know-how; •defend against third-party intellectual property claims of infringement, misappropriation or other violation; and •attract, hire and retain qualified personnel. Our expenses could increase beyond expectations if we are required by the FDA, EMA, the competent authorities of individual EU Member States, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to perform preclinical studies or clinical trials in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Even if one or more of the product candidates we may develop are approved for commercial sale, we anticipate incurring significant costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidate. Additionally, such products may become subject to unfavorable pricing regulations, third-party reimbursement practices or healthcare reform initiatives. Even if we are able to generate revenues from the sale of any approved product candidates, we may not become profitable and may need to obtain additional funding to continue operations. Our failure to become and remain profitable may have an adverse effect on the value of our company and depress the market price of our common stock and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product candidate pipeline, achieve our strategic objectives or continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment. Risks Related to Discovery, Development and Regulatory Approval of Product Candidates We are early in our development efforts, and as a result it will be years before we commercialize a product candidate, if ever. If we are unable to identify and advance product candidates through preclinical studies and clinical trials, obtain marketing approval and ultimately commercialize them, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed. The success of our business depends primarily upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize product candidates. We are early in our development efforts and discontinued our first Phase 1 study of our prior lead candidate, SEP-786, in 2025. Other than SEP-631, for which we presented data from the Phase 1 clinical trial at the AAAAI annual meeting on March 1, 2026, and SEP-479, for which we initiated our Phase 1 clinical trial in April 2026, our product candidates and development programs are in preclinical development or in the drug discovery stages. We have invested substantially all of our research efforts to date in developing our Native Complex Platform®, identifying potential product candidates and conducting preclinical and clinical studies. As an organization, we have limited experience in conducting and managing clinical trials necessary to obtain regulatory approvals, and we may be unable to do so for our product candidates. While we plan to continue to advance SEP-631 by evaluating potential clinical development strategies and to continue to advance SEP-479 in clinical development, and we are also planning to advance multiple lead compounds towards selection of a next-generation oral small molecule PTH1R agonist development candidate, we have not successfully completed any advanced clinical trials to date. Additionally, we have a portfolio of targets and programs that are in earlier stages of discovery or preclinical development and may never proceed to advanced clinical-stage development. If we are able to advance these other targets and programs into advanced clinical development, we do not have experience managing multiple clinical trials simultaneously, working with global clinical trials, or working in multiple different disease indications. Our ability to achieve and sustain profitability depends on obtaining regulatory approvals for, and successfully commercializing our product candidates, either alone or with third parties, and we cannot guarantee you that we will ever obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates. Before obtaining regulatory approval for the commercial distribution of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive preclinical tests and clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy in humans of our product candidates. We may not have the financial resources to continue development of, or the ability to enter into new collaborations for, a product candidate if we experience any issues that delay or prevent regulatory approval of, or our ability to commercialize, product candidates, including: •preclinical study results may show the product candidate to be less effective than desired or to have harmful or problematic side effects; •negative or inconclusive results from our clinical trials or the clinical trials of others for product candidates similar to ours, leading to a decision or requirement to conduct additional preclinical testing or clinical trials or abandon a program; •product-related side effects experienced by patients in our clinical trials or by individuals using product similar to our product candidates; •our third-party manufacturers’ inability to successfully manufacture our products; •inability of any third-party contract manufacturer to scale up manufacturing of our product candidates and those of our collaborators to supply the needs of clinical trials or commercial sales; •delays in submitting INDs or other comparable foreign applications or delays or failures in obtaining the necessary approvals from regulators to commence a clinical trial, or a suspension or termination of a clinical trial once commenced; 37 •preclinical studies conducted outside of the United States may be affected by tariffs (including tariffs that have been or may in the future be imposed by the United States or other countries), sanctions, trade protection measures or import/export restrictions imposed by the United States or other foreign governments (including further legislation or actions taken by the United States or other countries that restrict trade); •conditions imposed by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities regarding the scope or design of our clinical trials; •delays in enrolling patients in our clinical trials; •high drop-out rates of our clinical trial patients; •inadequate supply or quality of product candidate components or materials or other supplies necessary for the conduct of our clinical trials; •inability to obtain alternative sources of supply for which we have a single source for product candidate components or materials; •greater than anticipated costs of our clinical trials; •manufacturing costs, formulation issues, pricing or reimbursement issues, or other factors that no longer make a product candidate economically feasible; •harmful side effects or inability of our product candidates to meet efficacy endpoints during clinical trials; •failure to demonstrate a benefit-risk profile acceptable to the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities; •unfavorable FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authority inspection and review of any of the clinical trial sites or manufacturing facilities used in the testing and manufacture of any of our product candidates; •failure of our third-party contractors or investigators to comply with regulatory requirements or otherwise meet their contractual obligations in a timely manner, or at all; •delays and changes in regulatory requirements, policy and guidelines, including the imposition of additional regulatory oversight around clinical testing generally or with respect to our technology in particular; or •varying interpretations of our data by the FDA, EMA, and similar foreign regulatory authorities. Our inability to complete development of, or commercialize our product candidates, or significant delays in doing so due to one or more of these factors, could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Preclinical and clinical drug development is a lengthy and expensive process, with uncertain timelines and outcomes. If preclinical studies or clinical trials of our product candidates are prolonged or delayed, we may be unable to obtain required regulatory approvals, and therefore, be unable to commercialize our therapeutic candidates or any of our future therapeutic candidates on a timely basis or at all. Successful development of pharmaceutical products involves a lengthy and expensive process, is highly uncertain, and is dependent on numerous factors, many of which are beyond our control. Product candidates that appear promising in the early phases of development may fail to reach the market for several reasons, including: •clinical trial results may show the product candidates to be less effective than expected (for example, a clinical trial could fail to meet its primary or key secondary endpoint(s)) or have an unacceptable safety or tolerability profile; •failure to receive the necessary regulatory approvals or a delay in receiving such approvals, which, among other things, may be caused by patients who fail the trial screening process, slow enrollment in clinical trials, patients dropping out of trials, patients lost to follow-up, length of time to achieve trial endpoints, additional time requirements for data analysis or New Drug Application (“NDA”) or similar foreign application preparation, discussions with the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, including FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities requesting additional preclinical or clinical data (such as long-term toxicology studies), or encountering unexpected safety or manufacturing issues; •preclinical study results may show the product candidate to be less effective than desired or to have harmful on-target or off-target side effects; •imposition of extensive post-marketing approval requirements; or •the proprietary rights of others and their competing products and technologies that may prevent our product candidates from being commercialized. 38 Furthermore, the length of time necessary to complete clinical trials and submit an application for marketing approval for a final decision by a regulatory authority varies significantly from one product candidate to the next and from one country or jurisdiction to the next and may be difficult to predict. Even if we are successful in obtaining marketing approval, commercial success of any approved products will also depend in large part on the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement from third-party payors, including government payors such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs and managed care organizations in the United States or country-specific governmental organizations in foreign countries, which may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures designed to reduce the cost of healthcare. Third-party payors could require us to conduct additional studies, including post-marketing studies related to the cost effectiveness of a product, to qualify for reimbursement, which could be costly and divert our resources. If government and other healthcare payors were not to provide coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products once approved, market acceptance and commercial success would be reduced. Even if we are able to obtain coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products once approved, there may be features or characteristics of our products, such as dose preparation requirements, that prevent our products from achieving market acceptance by the healthcare or patient communities. In addition, if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, we will be subject to significant regulatory obligations regarding the submission of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration, and will need to continue to comply (or ensure that our third-party providers comply) with cGMPs and GCPs for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. In addition, there is always the risk that we, a regulatory authority or a third party might identify previously unknown problems with a product post-approval, such as AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency. Compliance with these requirements is costly, and any failure to comply or other issues with our product candidates post-approval could adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. We may encounter substantial delays in the commencement, enrollment or completion of our planned clinical trials or we may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities, which could prevent us from commercializing any product candidates we determine to develop on a timely basis, if at all. The risk of failure in developing product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any product candidate would prove effective or safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of any product candidate, we must complete preclinical development, submit an IND or comparable foreign application to permit initiation of clinical studies, and then conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of product candidates in humans. Before we can commence clinical trials for a product candidate, we must complete extensive preclinical testing and studies that support our INDs and other regulatory filings. We cannot be certain of the timely identification of a product candidate or the successful completion or outcome of our preclinical testing and studies and cannot predict whether the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities will accept our proposed clinical programs or whether the outcome of our preclinical testing and studies will ultimately support the further development of any product candidates. Conducting preclinical testing is a lengthy, time-consuming and expensive process. The length of time may vary substantially according to the type, complexity and novelty of the program, and often can be several years or more per program. As a result, we cannot be sure that we will be able to submit INDs or other comparable foreign regulatory submissions for our preclinical programs on the timelines we expect, if at all, and we cannot be sure that submission of INDs will result in the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authority allowing clinical trials to begin. Furthermore, product candidates are subject to continued preclinical safety studies, which may be conducted concurrently with our clinical testing. The outcomes of these safety studies may delay the launch of or enrollment in future clinical trials and could impact our ability to continue to conduct our clinical trials. Clinical testing is expensive, is difficult to design and implement, can take many years to complete and is uncertain as to outcome. We cannot guarantee that any clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, or at all. A failure of one or more clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing, which may result from a multitude of factors, including, but not limited to, flaws in trial design, dose selection issues, patient enrollment criteria and failure to demonstrate favorable safety or efficacy traits. Other events that may prevent successful enrollment, initiation or timely completion of clinical development include: •we may be unable to generate sufficient preclinical, toxicology or other in vivo or in vitro data to support the initiation of clinical trials; •delays in reaching a consensus with applicable regulatory authorities on trial design or implementation; •delays in obtaining regulatory authorization to commence a clinical trial; •delays in reaching agreement on acceptable terms with prospective CROs, other vendors, or clinical trial sites, the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different vendors and trial sites; •delays in obtaining approval from one or more IRBs refusing to approve, suspending or terminating the trial at an investigational site, precluding enrollment of additional participants, or withdrawing their approval of the trial; •delays in recruiting suitable patients to participate in our ongoing and planned clinical trials; 39 •changes to the clinical trial protocol; •clinical sites deviating from trial protocol or dropping out of a trial; •delays in manufacturing sufficient quantities of our product candidates for use in clinical trials, or delays in sufficiently developing, characterizing or controlling a manufacturing process suitable for clinical trials; •delays in having our product candidates being shipped on time, clearing customs and arriving at clinical trial sites intact; •delays in having patients complete participation in a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up; •participants choosing an alternative treatment for the indication for which we are developing our product candidates, or participating in competing clinical trials; •lack of adequate funding to continue a clinical trial; •occurrence of AEs or SAEs associated with the product candidate that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits; •occurrence of SAEs in clinical trials of the same class of agents conducted by other companies; •imposition of a temporary or permanent clinical hold by regulatory authorities; •selection of clinical trial end points that require prolonged periods of clinical observation or analysis of the resulting data; •clinical trials producing negative or inconclusive results; •a facility manufacturing our product candidates or any of their components being ordered by the FDA or comparable foreign authorities to temporarily or permanently shut down due to violations of cGMP regulations or other applicable requirements, or contamination or cross-contaminations of product candidates in the manufacturing process; •third-party clinical investigators losing the licenses or permits necessary to perform our clinical trials, not performing our clinical trials on our anticipated schedule or consistent with the clinical trial protocol or other regulatory requirements or committing fraud; or •changes in regulatory requirements, guidance, or feedback from regulatory agencies that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols or otherwise modifying the design of our clinical trials. We could also encounter delays if a clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, by the IRBs overseeing the conduct of such trials, by a Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial or by the FDA, competent authorities of the EU Member States, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Such regulatory authorities may impose such a suspension or termination due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical trial operations or trial site by the FDA, competent authorities of the EU Member States, or other comparable regulatory foreign authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a drug, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. In addition, changes in regulatory requirements and policies may occur, and we may need to amend clinical trial protocols to comply with these changes. Amendments may require us to resubmit our clinical trial protocols to IRBs for reexamination and approval, which may impact the costs, timing or successful completion of a clinical trial. Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries, as we have done and may continue to do for our product candidates, presents additional risks that may delay completion of our clinical trials. These risks include the failure of enrolled patients in foreign countries to adhere to clinical protocols as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory requirements, as well as political, currency exchange and other economic risks relevant to such foreign countries. Investigators and patients may not be able to comply with clinical trial protocols if quarantines or other constraints impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly, our ability to recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff which in turn could adversely impact our clinical trial operations. Additionally, we may experience interruption of key clinical trial activities, such as clinical trial site monitoring, due to limitations on travel, quarantines or social distancing protocols imposed or recommended by federal or state governments, employers and others in connection with public health concerns. We may face delays in meeting our anticipated timelines for our ongoing and planned clinical trials, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. Any inability to successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to generate revenue from future product sales and regulatory and commercialization milestones. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional testing to bridge our modified product candidate to earlier versions. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, or allow our competitors to bring comparable products to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 40 Serious adverse events, undesirable side effects or other unexpected properties of our product candidates may be identified during development or after approval, which could lead to the discontinuation of our clinical development programs, refusal by regulatory authorities to approve our product candidates or, if discovered following marketing approval, revocation of marketing authorizations or limitations on the use of our product candidates, any of which would limit the commercial potential of such product candidate. To date, we have not completed the evaluation of any product candidates in advanced human clinical trials. It is impossible to predict when or if any product candidates we may develop will ultimately prove safe in humans. As is the case with pharmaceuticals generally, it is likely that there may be side effects and AEs associated with our product candidates’ use. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not the product candidate being studied caused these conditions. Regulatory authorities may draw different conclusions or require additional testing to confirm these determinations, if they occur. In addition, it is possible that as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials with a broader group of patients, or as use of these product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive marketing approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other AEs that were observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, will be reported by participants. Many times, side effects are only detectable after investigational product candidates are tested in large-scale, Phase 3 trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. If additional clinical experience indicates that any of our product candidates has serious or life-threatening side effects or other side effects that outweigh the potential therapeutic benefit, the development of the product candidate may fail or be delayed, or, if the product candidate has received marketing approval, such approval may be revoked, which would harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. In particular, because we are developing our product candidates for chronic indications, the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities will likely require that our product candidates demonstrate a higher level of safety over a longer period of time than would be the case for product candidates intended for short-term use. Moreover, if we elect, or are required, to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenue through their sale may be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly. Moreover, if our product candidates are associated with undesirable side effects in clinical trials or have characteristics that are unexpected, we may elect to abandon their development or limit their development to more narrow uses or subpopulations in which the undesirable side effects or other characteristics are less prevalent, less severe or more acceptable from a risk-benefit perspective, which may limit the commercial value for the product candidate if approved. We may also be required to modify our trial plans based on findings after we commence our clinical trials. Many compounds that initially showed promise in early-stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound. For example, we discontinued development of our previous lead candidate, SEP-786, following the observation of two unanticipated severe (Grade 3) events of elevated unconjugated bilirubin in the MAD portion of the Phase 1 trial. In addition, if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, the FDA could require us to include a boxed warning in our label or adopt a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”), to ensure that the benefits outweigh its risks, which may include, among other things, a medication guide outlining the risks of the drug for distribution to patients and a communication plan to health care practitioners. For example, the FDA required that the product label for NATPARA, an approved, injectable parathyroid hormone product targeting PTH1R for the management of hypoparathyroidism include a boxed warning related to the risk of osteosarcoma based on rodent carcinogenicity studies and also implemented a REMS program to ensure patients and prescribers were appropriately counseled on the benefits and risks of the drug. Similarly, the FDA initially included boxed warnings for FORTEO and TYMLOS, injectable PTH peptides approved for osteoporosis due to the risk of osteosarcoma. While we have not yet conducted carcinogenicity studies for any of our product candidates that target PTH1R, it is possible that absent compelling data to the contrary, the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities will similarly require a boxed warning if any product candidates we may advance to clinical development that target PTH1R are approved for marketing. Furthermore, if we or others later identify undesirable side effects caused by our product candidates, several other potentially significant negative consequences could result, including: •regulatory authorities may suspend or withdraw approvals of such product candidate; •regulatory authorities may require additional warnings on the label, including “boxed” warnings, or issue safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; •we may be required to change the way a product candidate is administered or conduct additional clinical trials; •we could be sued and held liable for harm caused to patients; •we could be subject to fines, injunctions, or the imposition of criminal or civil penalties; •we may need to conduct a recall; •we may be forced to suspend marketing of that product, or decide to remove the product from the marketplace; and •the product may become less competitive, and our reputation may suffer. 41 Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of our product candidates and could significantly harm our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. Our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation and compliance obligations, which is costly and time-consuming and which may cause unanticipated delays or prevent the receipt of the required approvals to commercialize our product candidates. The research, clinical development, testing, quality control, safety, effectiveness, manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, advertising, promotion, marketing, import, export, distribution, post-approval monitoring, and post-approval reporting of our product candidates are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA in the United States and by comparable foreign regulatory authorities in foreign markets. In the United States, neither we nor any current or future collaborators are permitted to market our product candidates until we receive regulatory approval from the FDA. The process of obtaining regulatory approval is expensive, often takes many years following the commencement of clinical trials and can vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product candidates involved, as well as the target indications and patient population. Approval policies or regulations may change, new relevant statutes or regulations may be enacted, and the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities have substantial discretion in the drug approval process, including the ability to delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons. Despite the time and expense invested in clinical development of product candidates, regulatory approval is never guaranteed. Neither we nor any current or future collaborator is permitted to market any of our product candidates in the United States until we receive approval from the FDA. In February 2026, the then-FDA Commissioner publicly indicated that a single adequate and well-controlled pivotal clinical trial supported by confirmatory evidence would be the FDA’s default standard moving forward for novel products, rather than two such trials; this statement was not a formal agency action, and the scope, implementation and durability of this policy position remain uncertain. In June 2026, the FDA issued revised draft guidance clarifying how sponsors can rely on one scientifically rigorous adequate and well-controlled clinical investigation with confirmatory evidence to satisfy the statutory substantial evidence of effectiveness standard. The FDA retains broad discretion to require additional clinical data for any product candidate, including a second adequate and well-controlled clinical trial. Prior to obtaining approval to commercialize a product candidate in the United States or abroad, we or our collaborators must demonstrate with substantial evidence from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials, and to the satisfaction of the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, that such product candidates are safe and effective for their intended uses. Results from preclinical studies and clinical trials can be interpreted in different ways. Even if we believe the preclinical or clinical data for our product candidates are promising, such data may not be sufficient to support approval by the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which could require us to delay or abandon clinical development plans. In addition, regulatory authorities may require us to conduct further preclinical studies before evaluating our product candidate in a clinical trial. Once we initiate clinical trials, the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require additional clinical trials or suggest changes to our planned clinical trials, prior to and in support of the approval of a NDA or equivalent foreign marketing application. Changes to data requirements by the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities during the development of our product candidates may cause the applicable regulatory authorities to require us to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials for our product candidates either prior to or post-approval, or regulatory authorities may object to elements of our clinical development program. The FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities can delay, limit or deny approval of a product candidate for many reasons, including: •such authorities may disagree with the design or implementation of our clinical trials; •negative or ambiguous results from our clinical trials or results may not meet the level of statistical significance required by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities for approval; •serious and unexpected drug-related side effects may be experienced by participants in our clinical trials or by individuals using drugs similar to our product candidates; •the population studied in the clinical trial may not be sufficiently broad or representative to assure safety in the full population for which we seek approval; •such authorities may not accept clinical data from trials which are conducted at clinical facilities or in countries where the standard of care is potentially different from that of the United States; •the inability to demonstrate that a product candidate is safe and effective, and that a product candidate’s clinical and other benefits outweigh its safety risks; •such authorities may disagree with our interpretation or analysis of data from preclinical studies or clinical trials; such authorities may not agree that the data collected from clinical trials of our product candidates are acceptable or sufficient to support the submission of an NDA or other submission or to obtain regulatory approval in the United States or elsewhere, and such authorities may impose requirements for additional preclinical studies or clinical trials; •such authorities may disagree regarding the formulation, labeling and/or the specifications of our product candidates; 42 •approval may be granted only for indications that are significantly more limited than what has been applied for and/or with other significant restrictions on distribution and use; •such authorities may find deficiencies in the manufacturing processes, approval policies or facilities of our third-party manufacturers with which we or any of our current or future collaborators contract for clinical and commercial supplies; or •the approval policies or regulations of such authorities may significantly change in a manner rendering our or any of our current or future collaborators’ clinical data insufficient for approval. With respect to foreign markets, approval procedures vary among countries and, in addition to the foregoing risks, may involve additional product testing, administrative review periods and agreements with pricing authorities. In addition, events raising questions about the safety of certain marketed pharmaceuticals may result in increased cautiousness by the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities in reviewing new drugs based on safety, efficacy or other regulatory considerations and may result in significant delays in obtaining regulatory approvals. Any delay in obtaining, or inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approvals would prevent us or any of our current or future collaborators from commercializing our product candidates. Of the large number of drugs in development, only a small percentage successfully complete the FDA, EMA, or foreign regulatory approval processes and are commercialized. The lengthy approval process as well as the unpredictability of future clinical trial results may result in our failing to obtain regulatory approval to market our product candidates, which would significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Enrollment and retention of patients in clinical trials is an expensive and time-consuming process and could be made more difficult or rendered impossible by multiple factors outside our control, which could adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects. Patient enrollment and retention in clinical trials is a significant factor in the timing of clinical trials and depends on many factors, including the size and nature of the patient population, the nature of the trial protocol, the existing body of safety and efficacy data with respect to the study drug, the number, nature and duration of competing treatments and ongoing clinical trials of competing drugs for the same indication, the proximity of patients to clinical trial sites and the eligibility criteria for the clinical trial. As our programs progress, we or our collaborators may not be able to initiate or continue clinical trials for any product candidates we identify or develop if sufficient numbers of eligible patients are unable to be located and enrolled to participate in these trials as required by the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign authorities, or as needed to provide appropriate statistical power for a given trial. For certain of our product candidates, the conditions which we may evaluate include rare diseases with limited patient pools from which to draw. In some cases, patient populations for rare diseases are located at specific academic sites focused on such indications, often with multiple competing clinical trials. Potential patients for any planned clinical trials may not be adequately diagnosed or identified with the diseases which we are targeting or may not meet the entry criteria for such trials. We or our collaborators also may encounter difficulties in identifying and enrolling patients with a stage of disease appropriate for the planned clinical trials and monitoring such patients adequately during and after treatment. As noted above, other pharmaceutical companies targeting these same diseases are recruiting clinical trial patients from these patient populations, and patients who would otherwise be eligible for our clinical trials may instead enroll in clinical trials of our competitors’ product candidates, which may make it more difficult to fully enroll patients in clinical trials for our product candidates. In addition, the process of finding and diagnosing patients may prove costly. The eligibility criteria of clinical trials for our product candidates, once established, may further limit the pool of available trial participants. If the actual number of patients with these diseases is smaller than anticipated, clinical trials for our product candidates may encounter difficulties in enrolling patients, thereby delaying or preventing development and approval of our product candidates. Even once a sufficient number of patients have been enrolled in a clinical trial for our product candidate, the inability to retain patients through to the study’s completion may cause a failure of the study to meet its objectives and/or clinical endpoints. The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on the ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the study until its conclusion. We may experience difficulties in patient enrollment or retention in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons. Patient enrollment and retention in clinical trials depends on many factors, including: •the size and nature of the patient population, in particular for rare diseases such as the diseases on which we are focused initially, and process for identifying patients; •the severity of the disease under investigation; •the design of the trial protocol; •efforts to facilitate timely enrollment in clinical trials; •the existing body of safety and efficacy data for the product candidate; •the number and nature of competing treatments and ongoing clinical trials of competing therapies for the same indication; •the proximity and availability of clinical trial sites for patients; 43 •the eligibility and exclusion criteria for the trial; •the complexity of the trial, including number of office visits, lab tests, patient evaluations, and dosing regimens; •the ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience; •the ability to adequately monitor patients during a trial, clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied; •the risk that enrolled patients will drop out of a trial before completing all site visits; and •clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the drug being studied in relation to other available therapies. Furthermore, our efforts to build relationships with patient communities may not succeed, which could result in delays in patient enrollment in clinical trials for our product candidates. In addition, any negative results we or our collaborators may report in clinical trials of a given product candidate may make it difficult or impossible to recruit and retain patients in other clinical trials of that same product candidate. Delays or failures in planned patient enrollment or retention may result in increased costs, program delays or both, which could have a harmful effect on our ability to develop our product candidates, or could render further development impossible. Further, if patients drop out of clinical trials for our product candidates, miss scheduled doses or follow-up visits, or otherwise fail to follow clinical trial protocols, the integrity of data from clinical trials for our product candidates may be compromised or not accepted by the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, which would represent a significant setback for the applicable program. In addition, we may rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure proper and timely conduct of our future clinical trials and, while we intend to enter into agreements governing their services, we will be limited in our ability to compel their actual performance. Such delays or failures could adversely affect our business, operating results and prospects. Even if we receive regulatory approval of any product candidates, we will be subject to ongoing regulatory obligations and continued regulatory review, which may result in significant additional expense and we may be subject to penalties if we fail to comply with regulatory requirements or experience unanticipated problems with our product candidates. If any of our product candidates are approved, they will be subject to ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing, labeling, packaging, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling, record-keeping, conduct of post-marketing studies and submission of safety, efficacy and other post-market information, including both federal and state requirements in the United States and requirements of comparable foreign regulatory authorities. In addition, we will be subject to continued compliance with cGMP and GCP requirements for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval. Manufacturers and manufacturers’ facilities are required to comply with extensive FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authority requirements, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP regulations and applicable product tracking and tracing requirements. As such, we and our contract manufacturers will be subject to continual review and inspections to assess compliance with cGMP and adherence to commitments made in any NDA, other marketing application and previous responses to inspection observations. Accordingly, we and others with whom we work must continue to expend time, money and effort in all areas of regulatory compliance, including manufacturing, production and quality control. Any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. Certain endpoint data we hope to include in any approved product labeling also may not make it into such labeling, including exploratory or secondary endpoint data such as patient-reported outcome measures. The FDA may also require a REMS program as a condition of approval of our product candidates, which could entail requirements for long-term patient follow-up, a medication guide, physician communication plans or additional elements to ensure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. In addition, if the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority approves our product candidates, we will have to comply with requirements including submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports and registration. The FDA may impose consent decrees or withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with our product candidates, including AEs of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with our third-party manufacturers or manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information, imposition of post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things: •restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of our products, withdrawal of the product from the market or voluntary product recalls; •fines, warning letters or holds on clinical trials; 44 •refusal by the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications filed by us or suspension or withdrawal of approvals; •product seizure or detention or refusal to permit the import or export of our product candidates; and •injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. Additionally, sponsors of approved drugs and biologics must provide six months’ notice to the FDA of any changes in marketing status, such as the withdrawal of a drug, and failure to do so could result in the FDA issuing a publicly available non-compliance letter to the sponsor. The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Products may be promoted only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The policies of the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. In addition, the U.S. Supreme Court’s July 2024 decision to overturn established case law giving deference to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language has introduced uncertainty regarding the extent to which the FDA’s regulations, policies and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and/or changes. As a result of the U.S. Supreme Court’s decision, the FDA and other agencies may be less inclined to engage in formal regulation and may rely to a greater degree on informal guidance, which may not always be susceptible to immediate challenge. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation or guidance that may arise from future court decisions, legislation, or administrative action, either in the United States or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or guidance or the adoption of new requirements, guidance, or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability. If we do not achieve our projected development goals in the time frames we announce and expect, the commercialization of our therapeutics may be delayed and, as a result, our stock price may decline. From time to time, we estimate the timing of the anticipated accomplishment of various scientific, clinical, regulatory and other product development goals, which we sometimes refer to as milestones. These milestones may include our expectations regarding the commencement or completion of scientific studies and clinical trials and the submission of regulatory filings. From time to time, we may publicly announce the expected timing of some of these milestones, such as the completion of an ongoing clinical trial or the initiation of other clinical programs. All of these milestones are and will be based on numerous assumptions, including: •our available capital resources or capital constraints we experience; •the rate of progress, costs and results of clinical trials for our drug candidates and research and development activities, including the extent of scheduling conflicts with participating clinicians and collaborators; •our or our collaborators’ ability to identify and enroll patients who meet clinical trial eligibility criteria; •our or our collaborators’ receipt of approvals by the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities and the timing thereof; •other actions, decisions or rules issued by regulators; •our or our collaborators’ ability to access sufficient, reliable and affordable supplies of materials used to manufacture our product candidates; •the efforts of our collaborators with respect to the commercialization of our product candidates; •the securing of, costs related to, and timing issues associated with, product manufacturing as well as sales and marketing activities; and •securing product reimbursement The actual timing of these milestones can vary dramatically compared to our estimates, in some cases for reasons beyond our control. If these milestones are not met as publicly announced, or at all, the commercialization of our product candidates may be delayed or never achieved and, as a result, our stock price may decline. Results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials on any of our product candidates may not be predictive of results of future clinical trials. The outcome of preclinical studies and early clinical trials may not be predictive of the success of later clinical trials. Many companies in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have suffered significant setbacks in late-stage clinical trials after achieving positive results in early-stage development, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. These setbacks have been caused by, among other things, preclinical findings made while clinical trials were underway or safety or efficacy observations made in preclinical studies and clinical trials, including previously unreported AEs. In addition, while the animal models used in preclinical studies are designed to be representative of disease states in humans, these preclinical models may not be able to accurately predict the way a product candidate will affect patients in clinical trials. We have limited experience in designing clinical trials and may 45 be unable to design and execute a clinical trial to support regulatory approval. In addition, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their product candidates. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, changes in and adherence to the dosing regimen, product formulation and other clinical trial protocols and the rate of dropout among clinical trial patients. If we fail to receive positive results in clinical trials of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for our most advanced product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects would be negatively impacted. We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success. We have limited financial and managerial resources, and to date, we have focused on research programs and product candidates within the endocrinology, immunology and inflammation, neurology and metabolic therapeutic areas. In April 2026, we announced initiation of a placebo-controlled, SAD and MAD Phase 1 clinical trial in Australia of our new PTH1R development candidate, SEP-479. Correctly prioritizing our research and development activities is particularly important for us due to the breadth of potential product candidates and indications that we believe could be pursued by leveraging our Native Complex Platform®. As a result, we may forgo or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or in other therapeutic areas that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to timely capitalize on viable commercial products or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. We must continually assess the potential commercial viability of our research programs and product candidates, and we may decide to pause or discontinue development of any of our product candidates based upon such assessments, even if we obtain positive data from our product candidates in preclinical studies and clinical trials. Our proprietary Native Complex Platform® is based on novel technologies that are unproven and may not result in approvable or marketable products, which exposes us to unforeseen risks and makes it difficult for us to predict the time and cost of product development and potential for regulatory approval, and we may not be successful in our efforts to expand our development portfolio of product candidates. A key element of our strategy is to use our proprietary Native Complex Platform® to overcome the historical limitations of GPCR drug development, including the isolation, purification and stabilization of GPCRs in their native forms, in order to build a robust and diverse portfolio of potentially first-in-class and best-in-class oral small molecule therapies that address both well-validated and novel GPCR targets. The scientific research that forms the basis of our efforts to develop product candidates with our platform is still ongoing. We are not aware of any FDA approved therapeutics utilizing the technology underlying our platform. Further, the scientific evidence to support the feasibility of developing therapeutic treatments based on our platform is both preliminary and limited. As a result, we are exposed to a number of unforeseen risks and it is difficult to predict the types of challenges and risks that we may encounter during development of our product candidates. For example, we have only generated limited clinical data on our prior lead candidate, SEP-786, which led us to discontinue the program, and we have generated only limited early clinical data for SEP-631, our selective, oral small molecule MRGPRX2 negative allosteric modulator. Our current data on our development pipeline is limited to animal models and preclinical cell lines, the results of which may not translate into humans. Further, relevant animal models and assays may not accurately predict the safety and efficacy of our product candidates in humans, and we may encounter significant challenges creating appropriate models and assays for demonstrating the safety and purity of our product candidates. Given the novelty of our technology, we intend to work closely with the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities to perform the requisite scientific analyses and evaluation of our methods to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates; however, due to a lack of comparable experiences, the regulatory pathway with the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities may be more complex and time-consuming relative to other more well-known therapeutics. Even if we obtain human data to support our product candidates, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities may lack experience in evaluating the safety and efficacy of product candidates like those developed using our platform, which could result in a longer than expected regulatory review process, increase our expected development costs, and delay or prevent commercialization of our product candidates. We cannot be certain that our approach will lead to the development of approvable or marketable products, alone or in combination with other therapies. Although our research and development efforts to date have resulted in a development portfolio of potential programs and product candidates, we may not be able to discover or identify novel chemical matter to new GPCR targets and thus not be able to develop product candidates to expand our development portfolio. We may also pursue opportunities to acquire or in-license additional businesses, technologies or products, form strategic alliances or create joint ventures with third parties to complement or augment our existing business. However, we may not be able to identify any product candidates through such acquisition or in-license. 46 Even if we are successful in continuing to build and expand our development portfolio, the potential product candidates that we identify may not be suitable for clinical development. For example, they may be shown to have harmful side effects or other characteristics that indicate that they are unlikely to be drugs that will be successful in clinical trials or receive marketing approval and achieve market acceptance. If we do not successfully develop and commercialize product candidates, we will not be able to obtain drug revenues in future periods, which likely would result in significant harm to our financial position and adversely affect our stock price. Preliminary, topline and interim data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data. From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the topline or preliminary data we previously made public. As a result, topline and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between topline, preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, others, including regulatory agencies, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular product candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is the material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure, and any information we determine not to disclose may ultimately be deemed significant with respect to future decisions, conclusions, views, activities or otherwise regarding a particular product, product candidate or our business. If the topline or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition. We may develop our product candidates in combination with other therapies, which would expose us to additional risks. We may develop our product candidates in combination with one or more currently approved therapies or therapies in development. Even if any of our product candidates were to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with any of our product candidates, or safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. In addition, it is possible that existing therapies with which our product candidates are approved for use could themselves fall out of favor or be relegated to later lines of treatment. This could result in the need to identify other combination therapies for our product candidates or our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially. We may also evaluate our product candidates in combination with one or more other therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell any product candidate in combination with any such unapproved therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval. Furthermore, we cannot be certain that we will be able to obtain a steady supply of such therapies for use in developing combinations with our product candidates on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any failure to obtain such therapies for use in clinical development and the expense of purchasing therapies in the market may delay our development timelines, increase our costs and jeopardize our ability to develop our product candidates as commercially viable therapies. If the FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities do not approve or withdraw their approval of these other therapies, or if safety, efficacy, commercial adoption, manufacturing or supply issues arise with the therapies we choose to evaluate in combination with any of our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or successfully market any one or all of the product candidates we develop. Additionally, if the third-party providers of therapies or therapies in development used in combination with our product candidates are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization of our product candidates, or if the cost of combination therapies are prohibitive, our development and commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and growth prospects. 47 Risks Related to Commercialization, Marketing and Competition We currently have no marketing and sales organization and have no experience as a company in commercializing products, and we may invest significant resources to develop these capabilities. If we are unable to establish marketing, sales or distribution capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, we may not be able to generate product revenue. We have no internal sales, marketing or distribution capabilities, nor have we as a company commercialized a product. If any of our product candidates ultimately receives marketing approval, we will be required to build a marketing and sales organization with technical expertise and supporting distribution capabilities to commercialize each such product in the markets that we target, which will be expensive and time consuming, or collaborate with third parties that have direct sales forces and established distribution systems, either to augment our own sales force and distribution systems or in lieu of our own sales force and distribution systems. We have no prior experience as a company in the marketing, sale and distribution of pharmaceutical products and there are significant risks involved in building and managing a sales organization, including our ability to hire, retain and incentivize qualified individuals, generate sufficient sales leads, provide adequate training to sales and marketing personnel and effectively manage a geographically dispersed sales and marketing team. Furthermore, we are currently developing products for multiple indications in different medical specialties, which will require us to build different sales and marketing capabilities that are tailored to a given product or medical specialty. Any failure or delay in the development of our internal sales, marketing and distribution capabilities would adversely impact the commercialization of these products. We may not be able to enter into collaborations or hire consultants or external service providers to assist us in sales, marketing and distribution functions on acceptable financial terms, or at all. In addition, our product revenues and our profitability, if any, may be lower if we rely on third parties for these functions than if we were to market, sell and distribute any products that we develop ourselves. We likely will have little control over such third parties, and any of them may fail to devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our products effectively. If we are not successful in commercializing our products, either on our own or through arrangements with one or more third parties, we may not be able to generate any future product revenue and we would incur significant additional losses. Even if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval, such product candidate may fail to achieve market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors or others in the medical community necessary for commercial success, in which case we may not generate significant revenues or become profitable. We have never commercialized a product, and even if any of our product candidates are approved by the appropriate regulatory authorities for marketing and sale, it may nonetheless fail to gain sufficient market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community. Historically, several injectable PTH peptides have been approved by the FDA and other regulatory authorities for treatment of hypoparathyroidism and osteoporosis. However, our lead product candidate is an oral small molecule agonist; to date, no such oral small molecule in this indication has been approved by the FDA or any other regulatory agency. Market participants with significant influence over acceptance of new treatments, such as clinicians and third-party payors, may not adopt new oral treatments for hypoparathyroidism or osteoporosis, and we may not be able to convince the medical community and third-party payors to accept and use, or to provide favorable reimbursement for, any product candidates developed by us or our existing or future collaborators. If our product candidates do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenue and may not become profitable. The degree of market acceptance of our product candidates, if approved for commercial sale, will depend on a number of factors, including but not limited to: •the clinical indications and patient populations for which the product candidate is approved; •the safety, efficacy and potential advantages compared to alternative treatments and therapies; •the timing of market introduction of the product as well as competitive products; •effectiveness of sales and marketing efforts; •the strength of our or our collaborators’ relationships with patient communities; •the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments and therapies, including any similar generic treatments; •the ability to offer such product for sale at competitive prices; •the convenience and ease of administration compared to alternative treatments and therapies; •the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies; •limitations or warnings, including distribution or use of restrictions contained in the product’s approved labeling; •the availability of third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement; •the willingness of patients to pay out-of-pocket in the absence of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third-party payors and government authorities; •the strength of marketing and distribution support; 48 •the inclusion of any REMS program or other restrictions included by the regulators; •the prevalence and severity of any side effects; and •any restrictions on the use of the product together with other medications. The efforts to educate physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community on the benefits of our product candidates may require significant resources and may never be successful. Because we expect sales of our product candidates, if approved, to form the basis for substantially all of our revenues for the foreseeable future, the failure of our product candidates, if approved, to find market acceptance would harm our business and could require us to seek additional financing. Even if we are able to commercialize any product candidate, the third-party payor coverage and reimbursement status of newly-approved products is uncertain. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue. The availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid, private health insurers and other third-party payors in the United States are essential for most patients to be able to afford treatments such as our products or product candidates, if approved. Our ability to achieve acceptable levels of coverage and reimbursement for drug treatments by governmental authorities, private health insurers and other organizations will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize our products, and potentially attract additional collaboration partners to invest in the development of our product candidates. We cannot be sure that adequate coverage and reimbursement in the United States, the EU, Australia or elsewhere will be available for our products or any products that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future. For more information, see the section titled “Business–Government Regulation–Coverage and Reimbursement” in the 2025 Annual Report. Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for pharmaceutical products, medical devices and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs when an equivalent generic drug is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our products or product candidates, if approved, and a generic drug as substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the generic drug. Even if we show improved efficacy or safety or improved convenience of administration with our products or product candidates, if approved, pricing of an established drug for the same or similar indication may limit the amount we will be able to charge for such product. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our products or product candidates, and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop. There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs, biologics and medical devices will be covered. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs, biologics and medical devices. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our products or product candidates. Outside the United States, international operations are generally subject to extensive governmental price controls and other market regulations, and we believe the increasing emphasis on cost-containment initiatives in Europe, Canada, and other countries has and will continue to put pressure on the pricing and usage of our products and product candidates, if approved, and on drugs related to our product candidates. In many countries, the prices of medical products are subject to varying price control mechanisms as part of national health systems. Many countries, including the EU Member States, established complex and lengthy procedures to obtain price approvals, coverage and reimbursement. These procedures vary from country to country but are commonly initiated after grant of the related marketing authorization. More particularly, in the EU, potential reductions in prices and changes in reimbursement levels could be the result of different factors, including reference pricing systems. It could also result from the application of external reference pricing mechanisms, which consist of arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced countries. Reductions in the pricing of our medicinal products in one EU Member State could affect the price in other EU Member States and, thus, have a negative impact on our financial results. Other countries allow companies to fix their own prices for medical products, but monitor and control company profits. Additional foreign price controls or other changes in pricing regulation could restrict the amount that we are able to charge for our products or product candidates. Accordingly, in markets outside the United States, the reimbursement for our products may be reduced compared with the United States and may be insufficient to generate commercially reasonable revenue and profits. As an example, many EU Member States review periodically their decisions concerning the pricing and reimbursement of medicinal products. The outcome of these reviews cannot be predicted and could have adverse effects on the pricing and reimbursement of our medicinal products in the EU Member States. Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the United States and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for new products approved and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our products or product candidates. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of our products and product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, 49 particularly prescription drugs, medical devices and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than us. The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition, and a strong emphasis on proprietary and novel products and product candidates. While we believe our product candidates, platform, knowledge, experience and scientific personnel provide us with several key competitive advantages, we face competition from major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions, among others. Our future success will depend in part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with our structure-based drug discovery platform. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change in utilizing our platform to create and develop product candidates, we may be unable to compete effectively. Our competitors may render our approach obsolete by advances in existing technological approaches or the development of new or different approaches, potentially eliminating the advantages in our drug discovery process that we believe we derive from our research approach and platform. Several other companies also focus on GPCRs and have platform technologies that are distinct from the Native Complex Platform®, including Nxera Pharma Co., Ltd. (formerly Sosei Heptares), Structure Therapeutics Inc., Tectonic Therapeutics, Inc., and Confo Therapeutics. In addition, we face competition with respect to our product candidates and will face competition with respect to any other product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical companies, specialty pharmaceutical companies and biotechnology companies worldwide. There are several large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies that currently market and sell products or are pursuing the development of product candidates for the treatment of the indications that we are pursuing. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization. We are aware of several pharmaceutical companies that have commenced clinical trials of product candidates or have successfully commercialized products addressing areas that we are targeting. Takeda Pharmaceuticals owns the rights to parathyroid hormone product (brand name NATPARA) for the treatment of hypoparathyroidism. NATPARA was voluntarily recalled due to manufacturing issues in September 2019 in the United States and is now only available to a limited number of patients through a Special Use Program offered by its manufacturer. In October 2022, Takeda Pharmaceuticals announced manufacturing of all strengths of NATPARA will be discontinued globally by the end of 2024. Ascendis Pharma received regulatory approval for a proprietary once-daily injectable PTH peptide, palopegteriparatide (brand name YORVIPATH), in Europe and the United States. In March 2024, AstraZeneca acquired Amolyt Pharma, who was developing eneboparatide, a proprietary, once-daily injectable PTH peptide, for hypoparathyroidism, reported positive results from its Phase 3 trial in May 2026. In addition, we are aware of several academic groups and companies working on making longer-acting agonists of the PTH1R. Other companies and groups are developing or commercializing therapies for hypoparathyroidism, including Calcilytix Therapeutics, Inc. (a BridgeBio Pharma, Inc. company), Entera Bio Ltd, Extend Biosciences, Inc., and MBX Biosciences, Inc. Several companies are developing clinical-stage small molecule MRGPRX2 inhibitors, including Escient Pharmaceuticals (acquired by Incyte Pharmaceuticals in April 2024), Evommune, Inc. and BioArdis LLC. Further there are several other companies pursuing therapies for chronic spontaneous urticaria addressing other receptors of interest, such a Genentech, Inc., Sanofi, Celldex Therapeutics, Inc., Jasper Therapeutics, Inc., Novartis AG, Third Harmonic Bio, Inc., and Blueprint Medicines (a Sanofi company). For TSHR, we are aware that Byondis BV and Crinetics Pharmaceuticals (which reported in July 2026 that it and Vertex Pharmaceuticals Incorporated (“Vertex”) had entered into a definitive agreement under which Vertex will acquire Crinetics Pharmaceuticals) are also working on research stage compounds, but they have not yet entered clinical development. In addition, several companies are working on other mechanisms to address Graves’ disease, such as Immunovant, Inc., and TED, including Amgen, Inc., Viridian Therapeutics, argenx SE, Roche Holding AG, Lassen Therapeutics, Inc., Tourmaline Bio, Inc. (acquired by Novartis in October 2025), Sling Therapeutics, Inc., and Acelyrin, Inc. (merged with Alumis, Inc. in May 2025). There are also several currently approved injectable products targeting incretin receptors for the treatment of obesity or type 2 diabetes (“T2D”). These include, but are not limited to, products such as Ozempic and Wegovy (semaglutide, each marketed by Novo Nordisk A/S) for T2D and obesity, respectively, Trulicity (dulaglutide, marketed by Eli Lilly and Company) for T2D, and Mounjaro and Zepbound (tirzepatide, each marketed by Eli Lilly and Company) for T2D and obesity, respectively. There are also several injectable peptide products in development pursuing similar indications with similar mechanism of actions along with combination products, including those being developed by Amgen, Inc., AstraZeneca, Boehringer Ingelheim, Eli Lilly and Company, Novo Nordisk A/S, Roche Holding AG, and Viking Therapeutics, Inc., among others. In addition, there are oral products such as Rybelsus (semaglutide, marketed by Novo Nordisk A/S) approved for patients with T2D and other oral products in development for treating obesity or T2D, including those being developed by AstraZeneca, Eli Lilly and Company, Pfizer Inc., Roche Holding AG, Structure Therapeutics Inc., and Terns Pharmaceuticals, Inc. Based on our continuing evaluations of the competitive landscape, we may decide to reallocate resources and reprioritize our development programs if we determine that a particular product candidate or target indication is no longer commercially viable or advantageous. Many of our competitors, either alone or with their collaborators, have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, sales and supply resources or experience than we do. If we successfully obtain approval for any product candidate, we will face competition based on many different factors, including the safety and effectiveness of our products, the timing and scope of marketing approvals for these products, the availability and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, price, 50 reimbursement coverage and patent position. Competing products could present superior treatment alternatives, including by being more effective, safer, more convenient, less expensive or marketed and sold more effectively than any products we may develop. Competitive products may make any products we develop obsolete or noncompetitive before we recover the expense of developing and commercializing our product candidates. If we are unable to compete effectively, our opportunity to generate revenue from the sale of our products we may develop, if approved, could be adversely affected. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller and other early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific, management and commercial personnel, establishing clinical trial sites and subject registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Any failure to compete effectively could harm our business, financial condition and operating results. EU drug marketing and reimbursement regulations may materially affect our ability to market and receive coverage for our products in the EU Member States. We intend to seek approval to market our product candidates in both the United States and in selected foreign jurisdictions, including the EU. If we obtain approval in one or more foreign jurisdictions for our product candidates, we will be subject to rules and regulations in those jurisdictions. In some foreign countries, particularly those in the EU, the pricing of products is subject to governmental control and other market regulations which could put pressure on the pricing and usage of our product candidates. In these countries, pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after obtaining marketing approval of a product candidate. In addition, market acceptance and sales of our product candidates will depend significantly on the availability of adequate coverage and reimbursement from third-party payors for our product candidates and may be affected by existing and future healthcare reform measures. Much like the federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibition in the United States, the provision of benefits or advantages to physicians to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is also prohibited in the EU. The provision of benefits or advantages to reward improper performance is typically governed by the national anti-bribery laws of EU Member States and the Bribery Act 2010 in the United Kingdom. Infringement of these laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment. EU Directive 2001/83/EC, which is the EU Directive governing medicinal products for human use, further provides that, where medicinal products are being promoted to persons qualified to prescribe or supply them, no gifts, pecuniary advantages or benefits in kind may be supplied, offered or promised to such persons unless they are inexpensive and relevant to the practice of medicine or pharmacy. This provision has been transposed into the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 and so remains applicable in the United Kingdom despite its departure from the EU. Payments made to physicians in certain EU Member States must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with physicians often must be the subject of prior notification and approval by the physician’s employer, his or her competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. These requirements are provided in the national laws, industry codes or professional codes of conduct, applicable in the EU Member States. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment. In addition, in some foreign countries, including some countries in the EU, the proposed pricing for a product must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing product pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. For example, some EU Member States have the option to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States, can further reduce prices. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. In some countries, we may be required to conduct a clinical trial or other studies that compare the cost-effectiveness of any of our product candidates to other available therapies in order to obtain or maintain reimbursement or pricing approval. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates. Historically, products launched in the EU do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or if reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, our revenues from sales and the potential profitability of any of our product candidates in those countries would be negatively affected. Obtaining and maintaining marketing approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining marketing approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions. Obtaining and maintaining marketing approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain marketing approval in any other jurisdiction. For example, even if the FDA grants marketing approval of a product candidate, it does not mean that comparable foreign regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion and reimbursement of the product candidate in those countries. However, a failure or delay in 51 obtaining marketing approval in one jurisdiction may negatively impact the marketing approval process in others. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from, and greater than, those in the United States, including additional preclinical studies or clinical trials, as clinical trials conducted in one jurisdiction may not be accepted by regulatory authorities in other jurisdictions. In many jurisdictions outside the United States, a product candidate must be approved for reimbursement before it can be approved for sale in that jurisdiction. In some cases, the price to be charged for a product candidate is also subject to approval. Obtaining foreign marketing approvals and establishing and maintaining compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we or our collaborators fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable marketing approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed, which would adversely affect our business, prospects, financial condition, and results of operations. Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to commercialize products in foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties. Our future growth may depend, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize our product candidates in foreign markets. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from applicable regulatory authorities in foreign markets, and we may never receive such regulatory approvals for any of our product candidates. To obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, manufacturing, commercial sales, pricing and distribution of our product candidates. If we obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates and ultimately commercialize our products in foreign markets, we would be subject to additional risks and uncertainties, including: •different regulatory requirements for approval of drugs in foreign countries; •reduced protection for intellectual property rights; •the existence of additional third-party patent rights of potential relevance to our business; •unexpected changes in tariffs, trade barriers and regulatory requirements; •economic weakness, including inflation, or political instability in particular foreign economies and markets; •compliance with tax, employment, immigration and labor laws for employees living or traveling abroad; •foreign currency fluctuations, which could result in increased operating expenses and reduced revenues, and other obligations incident to doing business in another country; •foreign reimbursement, pricing and insurance regimes; •workforce uncertainty in countries where labor unrest is common; •production shortages resulting from any events affecting raw material supply or manufacturing capabilities abroad; •business interruptions resulting from geopolitical actions, including war and terrorism, or natural disasters including earthquakes, typhoons, floods and fires; and •business interruptions resulting from pandemics or similar public health crises. If the market opportunities for any of our product candidates are smaller than we estimate, even assuming approval of a product candidate, our revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer. The precise incidence and prevalence for all the conditions we aim to address with our product candidates are unknown. Our projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with our product candidates, are based on our beliefs and estimates. These estimates have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations or market research, and may prove to be incorrect. Further, new information may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The total addressable market across all of our product candidates will ultimately depend upon, among other things, the diagnosis criteria included in the final label for each of our product candidates approved for sale for these indications, the availability of alternative treatments and the safety, convenience, cost and efficacy of our product candidates relative to such alternative treatments, acceptance by the medical community and patient access, drug pricing and reimbursement. The number of patients in the United States and other major markets and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, patients may not be otherwise amenable to treatment with our products or new patients may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, all of which would adversely affect our results of operations and our business. 52 Risks Related to Business Operation and Industry Our operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes our future operating results difficult to predict and could cause our operating results to fall below expectations or any guidance we may provide. Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly, which makes it difficult for us to predict our future operating results. These fluctuations may occur due to a variety of factors, many of which are outside of our control, including, but not limited to: •the timing, degree of success and cost of, and level of investment in, research, development, regulatory approval and commercialization activities relating to our product candidates, which may change from time to time; •coverage and reimbursement policies with respect to our product candidates, if approved, and potential future drugs that compete with our products; •the cost of manufacturing our product candidates, which may vary depending on FDA, EMA or other comparable foreign regulatory authority guidelines and requirements, the quantity of production and the terms of our agreements with third-party manufacturers; •expenditures that we may incur to acquire, develop or commercialize additional product candidates and technologies or other assets; •the level of demand for any of our product candidates, if approved, which may fluctuate significantly and be difficult to predict; •our ability to establish and maintain collaborations, licensing or other arrangements; •our ability to adequately support future growth; •future accounting pronouncements or changes in our accounting policies; •the timing and success or failure of preclinical studies or clinical trials or regulatory approval for our product candidates or any competing product candidates, or any other change in the competitive landscape of our industry, including consolidation among our competitors or partners; •any intellectual property infringement lawsuit or opposition, interference or cancellation proceeding in which we may become involved; •additions and departures of key personnel; •potential unforeseen business disruptions that increase our costs or expenses; •effects of macro events, such as inflation, tariffs, armed conflicts, geopolitical conflicts, pandemics, natural disasters and supply chain issues, on our business and operations; and •the changing and volatile global economic and political environment. In addition, from time to time, we may enter into license or collaboration agreements or strategic partnerships with other companies that include development funding and significant upfront and milestone payments and/or royalties, which may become an important source of our revenue. These upfront and milestone payments may vary significantly from period to period and any such variance could cause a significant fluctuation in our operating results from one period to the next. The cumulative effects of these factors could result in large fluctuations and unpredictability in our quarterly and annual operating results. As a result, comparing our operating results on a period-to-period basis may not be meaningful. Investors should not rely on our past results as an indication of our future performance. This variability and unpredictability could also result in our failing to meet the expectations of industry or financial analysts or investors for any period. If our revenue or operating results fall below the expectations of analysts or investors or below any forecasts we may provide to the market, or if the forecasts we provide to the market are below the expectations of analysts or investors, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Such a price decline could occur even when we have met any previously publicly stated revenue or earnings guidance we may provide. We expect to expand our organization, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations. As of June 30, 2026, we had 123 full-time employees. As we advance our research and development programs, we may need to further increase the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of clinical development, biology, chemistry, manufacturing, general and administrative matters related to being a public company, regulatory affairs and, if any of our product candidates receives marketing approval, sales, marketing and distribution. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must: •expand our general and administrative functions; 53 •identify, recruit, integrate, maintain and motivate additional qualified personnel; •manage our development efforts effectively, including the initiation and conduct of clinical trials for our product candidates; •establish and build a marketing and commercial organization; and •improve our operational, financial and management controls, reporting systems and procedures. Our future financial performance and our ability to develop, manufacture and commercialize our product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, on our ability to effectively manage any future growth, and our management may also have to divert financial and other resources, and a disproportionate amount of its attention away from day-to-day activities, to managing these growth activities. If we are not able to effectively expand our organization by hiring new employees and expanding our groups of consultants and contractors, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize our product candidates and, accordingly, may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals. We are highly dependent on the services of our senior management team and if we are not able to retain these members of our management team and recruit and retain additional management, clinical and scientific personnel, our business will be harmed. We are highly dependent on our senior management team. In particular, we are highly dependent on the development and management expertise of Jeffrey Finer, M.D., Ph.D., our Chief Executive Officer, and the other principal members of our management, scientific and clinical teams. The employment agreements we have with these officers do not prevent such persons from terminating their employment with us at any time. The loss of the services of any of these persons could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives. In addition, we will need to attract, retain and motivate highly qualified additional management, clinical and scientific personnel. If we are not able to retain our management and to attract, on terms acceptable to us, additional qualified personnel necessary for the continued development of our business, we may not be able to sustain our operations or grow. We may not be able to attract or retain qualified personnel in the future due to the intense competition for qualified personnel among biotechnology, pharmaceutical and other businesses. Many of the other pharmaceutical companies that we compete against for qualified personnel and consultants have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer operating history in the industry than we do. They also may provide more diverse opportunities and better chances for career advancement. Some of these characteristics may be more appealing to high-quality candidates and consultants than what we have to offer. If we are unable to attract, retain and motivate high-quality personnel and consultants to accomplish our business objectives, the rate and success at which we can discover and develop product candidates and our business will be limited and we may experience constraints on our development objectives. To induce valuable employees to remain at our company, in addition to salary and cash incentives, we have provided stock options that vest over time. The value to employees of stock options that vest over time may be significantly affected by movements in our stock price that are beyond our control and may at any time be insufficient to counteract more lucrative offers from other companies. Despite our efforts to retain valuable employees, members of our management, scientific and development teams may terminate their employment with us on short notice. For example, employment of our key employees is at-will, which means that any of our employees could leave our employment at any time, with or without notice. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed by employers other than us and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. Our future performance will also depend, in part, on our ability to successfully integrate newly hired executive officers into our management team and our ability to develop an effective working relationship among senior management. Our failure to integrate these individuals and create effective working relationships among them and other members of management could result in inefficiencies in the development and commercialization of our product candidates, harming future marketing approvals, sales of our product candidates and our results of operations. Our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements. We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, principal investigators, CROs, consultants, vendors and collaboration partners may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violate: (i) FDA, the national competent authorities of individual EU Member States, or comparable foreign regulations, including those laws that require the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities; (ii) manufacturing standards; (iii) U.S. federal and state fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, including foreign requirements; or (iv) laws that require the reporting of true and accurate financial information and data. Specifically, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. These activities also include the improper use of information obtained in the course 54 of clinical trials or falsification of clinical trial data, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. It is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third-parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, monetary fines, possible exclusion from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other U.S. federal or non U.S. healthcare programs, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, and curtailment of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. Changes in U.S. and international trade policies, particularly with respect to China, may adversely impact our business and operating results. The U.S. government has recently made statements and taken certain actions that may lead to potential changes to U.S. and international trade policies, including imposing several rounds of tariffs and export control and sanctions restrictions affecting certain products manufactured in China. Both China and the United States have each imposed tariffs indicating the potential for further trade barriers, including the U.S. Commerce Department adding numerous Chinese entities to its Unverified List, which requires U.S. exporters to go through more procedures before exporting goods to such entities. It is unknown whether and to what extent new tariffs, export controls, or other new laws or regulations will be adopted, or the effect that any such actions would have on us or our industry. For example, as described in greater detail in a risk factor below, the BIOSECURE Act may restrict certain relationships with designated “biotechnology companies of concern,” and result in supply chain disruptions or delays. Sustained uncertainty about or further escalating trade and political tensions between the U.S. and China may prevent or hinder the export of materials or technical information among us, our contract development and manufacturing organizations (“CDMOs”) and other relevant third parties, such as pharmaceutical partners, or could result in trade or retaliatory restrictions that may hinder or potentially inhibit our ability to rely on CDMOs and other service providers that operate in China. Further, regulatory or legislative action taken by the U.S. to impose restrictions on transactions with China, like the restrictions described above, could have the potential to severely restrict the ability of companies like ours to contract with Chinese biotechnology companies of concern, which could have adverse effects on the development of our product candidates and our business operations. See the risk factor titled “Risks Related to Third Party Relationships—We rely on third-party manufacturers, CROs, CMOs, and suppliers to supply, develop and test components of our product candidates. The loss of our third-party manufacturers, CROs, CMOs, or suppliers, their failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or to supply sufficient quantities at acceptable quality levels or prices, or at all, or changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing, development or formulation would materially and adversely affect our business.” Any unfavorable government policies on international trade, such as export controls, economic, sanctions, capital controls or tariffs, may increase the cost of manufacturing our product candidates and platform materials, affect our ability to commercialize our product candidates if approved, the competitive position of our product candidates, and import or export of raw materials and finished product candidate used in our preclinical studies and clinical trials, particularly with respect to any product candidates and materials that we import from China, including pursuant to our service arrangements with WuXi. If any new tariffs, export controls, sanctions, legislation and/or regulations are implemented, or if existing trade agreements are renegotiated or, in particular, if either the U.S. or Chinese government takes retaliatory trade actions due to the recent trade tensions, such changes could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Clinical trial and product liability lawsuits against us could divert our resources, could cause us to incur substantial liabilities and could limit commercialization of any product candidates we may develop. We face an inherent risk of clinical trial and product liability exposure related to the testing of any product candidates we may develop in clinical trials, and we will face an even greater risk if we commercially sell any products that we may develop. While we currently have not completed the evaluation of any product candidates in human clinical trials or that have been approved for commercial sale, the future use of product candidates by us in clinical trials, and the sale of any approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. These claims might be made by patients that use the product, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling such products. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against claims that our product candidates or products caused injuries, we will incur substantial liabilities. Regardless of merit or eventual outcome, liability claims may result in: •decreased demand for any product candidates that we may develop; •withdrawal of clinical trial participants and inability to continue clinical trials; •product recalls, withdrawals or labeling, marketing or promotional restrictions; •loss of revenue; •substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients; 55 •significant time and costs to defend any related litigation; •a diversion of our management’s time and our resources; •exhaustion of any available insurance and our capital resources; •initiation of investigations by regulators; •the inability to commercialize any product candidates that we may develop; •injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention; and •a decline in price of our common stock. If we continue to commence clinical trials or if we commence commercialization of any product candidates, we may seek to increase our insurance coverage. Insurance coverage is increasingly expensive. We may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. If and when coverage is secured, our insurance policies may also have various exclusions and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. Even if our agreements with any future corporate collaborators entitle us to indemnification against losses, such indemnification may not be available or adequate should any claim arise. If a successful clinical trial or product liability claim or series of claims is brought against us for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, our assets may not be sufficient to cover such claims and our business operations could be impaired. If we or any contract manufacturers and suppliers we engage fail to comply with environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations, we could become subject to fines or penalties or incur costs that could have a material adverse effect on the success of our business. We are subject to numerous foreign, federal, state and local environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing laboratory procedures and the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous materials and wastes. Our operations involve the use of hazardous and flammable materials, including chemicals and biological materials. Our operations also produce hazardous waste products. We generally contract with third parties for the disposal of these materials and wastes. We cannot eliminate the risk of contamination or injury from these materials. In the event of contamination or injury resulting from our use of hazardous materials, we could be held liable for any resulting damages, and any liability could exceed our resources, including any available insurance. Under certain environmental laws, we could be held responsible for costs relating to any contamination at our current or past facilities and at third-party facilities. We could incur significant costs and liabilities which may adversely affect our financial condition and operating results for failure to comply with such environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations, including, among other things, civil or criminal fines and penalties, property damage and personal injury claims, costs associated with upgrades to our facilities or changes to our operating procedures, or injunctions limiting or altering our operations. Compliance with applicable environmental laws and regulations may be expensive, and current or future environmental laws and regulations may impair our research and product development efforts. In addition, we cannot entirely eliminate the risk of accidental injury or contamination from these materials or wastes. Although we maintain workers’ compensation insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees resulting from the use of hazardous materials, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities. We do not maintain insurance for environmental liability or toxic tort claims that may be asserted against us in connection with our storage or disposal of biological, hazardous or radioactive materials. In the event of contamination or injury, we could be held liable for damages or be penalized with fines in an amount exceeding our resources, and our clinical trials or regulatory approvals could be suspended, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. In addition, we may incur substantial costs in order to comply with current or future environmental, health, and safety laws and regulations. These current or future laws and regulations, which are becoming increasingly more stringent, may impair our research, development or production efforts. Our failure to comply with these laws and regulations also may result in substantial fines, penalties or other sanctions. Our future ability to utilize our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited. Since our inception, we have incurred losses and we may never achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2025, we had $45.8 million of federal net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards and $77.9 million of state NOL carryforwards, available to reduce future taxable income. To the extent that we continue to generate taxable losses, under current law, our unused U.S. NOLs may be carried forward to offset a portion of future taxable income, if any. Additionally, we continue to generate business tax credits, including research and development tax credits, which generally may be carried forward to offset a portion of future taxable income, if any, subject to expiration of such credit carryforwards. Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (“Code”), if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as one or more stockholders or groups of stockholders who own at least 5% of the corporation’s equity increasing their equity ownership in the aggregate by more than 50 percentage points (by value) 56 over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. Similar rules may apply under state tax laws. Our prior equity offerings and other changes in our stock ownership may have resulted in such ownership changes in the past. In addition, we may experience ownership changes in the future due to shifts in our stock ownership, some of which are outside of our control. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs or other pre-change tax attributes to offset U.S. federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which could potentially result in increased future tax liability to us and could require us to pay U.S. federal income taxes earlier than would be required if such limitations were not in effect. There is a risk that due to changes under the tax law, regulatory changes or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs or business tax credits could expire or otherwise be unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities. At the state level, there may also be periods during which the use of NOLs or business tax credits is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. For example, under Senate Bill 167 enacted by California in June 2024, generally, there is a suspension of the NOL deduction for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2027 for individual and corporate taxpayers with net business income or modified adjusted gross income of $1 million or more, and a limit of $5 million of business credits on the aggregate use of otherwise allowable business tax credits that any individual or corporate taxpayer could claim for tax years beginning on or after January 1, 2024, and before January 1, 2027. For these reasons, we may not be able to realize a tax benefit from the use of our NOLs or tax credits, even if we attain profitability. We have and may in the future engage in strategic transactions that could impact our liquidity, increase our expenses and present significant distractions to our management. We have and in the future, we may consider strategic transactions, such as acquisitions of companies, asset purchases, and in-licensing or out-licensing of products, product candidates or technologies from time to time. Additional potential transactions that we may consider include a variety of different business arrangements, including spin-offs, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. Any such transaction may require us to incur non-recurring or other charges, may increase our near- and long-term expenditures and may pose significant integration challenges or disrupt our senior management or business, which could adversely affect our operations and financial results. For example, these transactions may entail numerous operational and financial risks, including: •up-front, milestone and royalty payments, equity investments and financial support of new research and development candidates including increase of personnel, all of which may be substantial; •exposure to unknown liabilities, including potential indemnification claims from a potential spin-off or out-license of certain of our intellectual property rights; •disruption of our business and diversion of our management’s time and attention to develop acquired products, product candidates or technologies; •incurrence of substantial debt or dilutive issuances of equity securities to pay for acquisitions; •higher than expected costs in risk-sharing collaborations; •higher-than-expected acquisition and integration costs; •lower-than-expected benefits, from out-licensing or selling our technology or intellectual property or from in-licensing intellectual property or purchasing assets; •write-downs of assets or goodwill or impairment charges; •difficulty and cost in combining or separating the operations and personnel of any acquired or sold businesses with our existing operations and personnel; •we may disagree with our strategic partners about decisions affecting the business, which could result in litigation or arbitration that increases our expenses, distracts our officers and directors and disrupts the day-to-day operations of the strategic venture, including by delaying important decisions until the dispute is resolved; •our strategic partners may take actions that we oppose; •our strategic partners might experience financial distress or become bankrupt; •impairment of relationships with key suppliers or customers of any acquired or sold businesses due to changes in our senior management and ownership; and •inability to retain key employees of any acquired businesses. In addition, to the extent we enter into a strategic transaction that includes ongoing operations or shared ownership and management, our strategic partners may take actions that we oppose or we may disagree with our strategic partners about decisions affecting the business, which could result in litigation or arbitration, distract our officers and directors and otherwise disrupt the 57 day-to-day operations of our business and the business of the strategic partner or entity. Furthermore, to the extent that our directors and officers serve on the boards of our strategic partners, such directors may be required to abstain from board decision-making in the event of a conflict of interest. Accordingly, although we cannot be certain that we will undertake or successfully complete any transactions of the nature described above, any transactions that we do complete may be subject to the foregoing or other risks, and could harm our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. We have conducted and may continue to conduct, clinical trials for our product candidates outside of the United States, and we may do so for our other product candidates. However, conducting trials outside of the United States exposes us to additional risks, which could materially harm our business. We have conducted, and may in the future conduct, certain of our clinical trials at centers outside of the United States. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction may be subject to conditions before being accepted, or may not be accepted at all, by the FDA or another comparable foreign regulatory authority. For example, in cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the study is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from trials conducted outside for the United States or the applicable jurisdiction, and the FDA has discussed proposals to increase user fees for marketing applications containing certain foreign clinical data. If the FDA, the EMA, the U.K. Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency, or other foreign regulatory authorities do not accept any data generated from other jurisdictions, we would likely be required to conduct additional clinical trials, which would be costly and time consuming, and delay aspects of our development plan, which could harm our business. Conducting trials outside the United States also exposes us to additional risks, including risks associated with: •additional foreign regulatory requirements; •foreign exchange fluctuations; •compliance with foreign manufacturing, customs, shipment and storage requirements; •cultural differences in medical practice and clinical research; •diminished protection of intellectual property in some countries; and •interruptions or delays in our trials resulting from geopolitical events, such as war or terrorism. If our information systems or data, or those of third parties with whom we work, are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences from such compromises, such as damage to our reputation, significant financial and legal exposure, or other adverse effects to our business. We rely on information technology systems that we or third parties with whom we work, operate to process, transmit and store electronic information, including sensitive information, in our day-to-day operations. For example, in connection with our product development efforts, we may collect and process a variety of personal data, proprietary information, trade secrets, and clinical trial information. As a result, we and the third parties with whom we work, face a variety of evolving threats that could cause cybersecurity incidents, data breaches, or other adverse security events. Cyberattacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud, and other similar activities could result in the theft or destruction of intellectual property, personal data, or other misappropriation of assets, or otherwise threaten to compromise our confidential or proprietary information and disrupt our operations. Attempts to disrupt or gain unauthorized access to our and our third-party vendors’ information systems from malicious third parties or insider threats may incorporate widely varying and frequently changing tactics, which may be enhanced or facilitated by artificial intelligence (“AI”). Such threats are increasing in their frequency, sophistication, and intensity, have become increasingly difficult to detect, and come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, intentional or inadvertent wrongful conduct by personnel and vendors (such as through human error, theft or misuse), sophisticated nation states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyberattacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities, wrongful conduct by hostile foreign governments and industrial espionage. During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties with whom we work may be vulnerable 58 to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to produce, sell and distribute our services. We and the third parties with whom we work are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to the deployment of harmful malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), ransomware, denial-of-service, credential stuffing, credential harvesting, social engineering fraud (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, attacks enhanced or facilitated by evolving technologies, such as AI, telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. In particular, severe ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, ability to provide our products or services, loss of sensitive data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. A successful cyberattack could cause serious negative consequences for us, including, without limitation, the disruption of operations, the misappropriation of confidential business information, including financial information, trade secrets, financial loss and the disclosure of corporate strategic plans. Although we devote resources to protect our information systems, there can be no assurance that our efforts will prevent information cybersecurity incidents or data breaches that would result in business, legal, financial or reputational harm to us, or would have a material adverse effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Remote work has become more common and has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our employees utilize network connections, computers, and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit and in public locations. Additionally, future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues or other constraints not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, creating additional challenges to integrate said information systems into our information technology environment and security program. Like other companies in our industry, we, and our third party vendors, have experienced threats and cybersecurity incidents relating to our information technology systems and infrastructure. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against cybersecurity incidents and data breaches, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. We take steps designed to detect, mitigate, and remediate known vulnerabilities in our information systems (such as our hardware and/or software, including that of third parties with whom we work). We may not, however, detect and remediate all such vulnerabilities on a timely basis for various reasons including but not limited to the impact on the functional operations of affected information systems or the availability of a solution for the impacted technology. While remedial measures and/or patches designed to address identified vulnerabilities are being developed and/or implemented, these vulnerabilities could be exploited and result in a cybersecurity incident or data breach. Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders, including affected individuals, customers, regulators, and investors, of cybersecurity incidents and data breaches. Such disclosures are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. Additionally, laws in all 50 states require businesses to provide notice to customers whose personal data has been disclosed as a result of a data breach. These laws are not consistent, and compliance in the event of a widespread cybersecurity incident or data breach is difficult and may be costly. We also may be contractually required to notify patients or other counterparties of a cybersecurity incident or data breach. Although we may have contractual protections with our service providers, any actual or perceived cybersecurity incident or data breach could harm our reputation and brand, expose us to potential liability or require us to expend significant resources on data security and in responding to any such actual or perceived cybersecurity incident or data breach. Any contractual protections we may have from our service providers may not be sufficient to adequately protect us from any such liabilities and losses, and we may be unable to enforce any such contractual protections. In addition to government regulation, privacy advocates and industry groups have and may in the future propose self-regulatory standards from time to time. These and other industry standards may legally or contractually apply to us, or we may elect to comply with such standards. Determining whether personal data has been handled in compliance with applicable privacy standards and our contractual obligations can be complex and may be subject to changing interpretation. Any failure, or perceived failure, to prevent or mitigate cybersecurity incidents, data breaches or other improper access to, use of, or disclosure of our clinical data or patients’ personal data could result in significant liability under state (e.g., state breach notification laws), federal (e.g., Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996), and foreign (e.g., the GDPR) laws, and may cause a material adverse impact to our reputation, affect our ability to conduct new studies and potentially disrupt our business, results of operations and financial condition. While we maintain insurance coverage, we cannot assure that such coverage will be adequate or otherwise protect us from or adequately mitigate liabilities or damages with respect to claims, costs, expenses, litigation, fines, penalties, business loss, data loss, regulatory actions or material adverse effects arising out of our data protection, privacy, and security practices, or that such coverage will continue to be available on acceptable terms or at all. The successful assertion of one or more large claims against us that exceeds our available insurance coverage, or results in changes to our insurance policies (including premium increases or the imposition of large 59 deductible or co-insurance requirements), could have an adverse effect on our business. In addition, we cannot be sure that our existing insurance coverage will continue to be available on acceptable terms or that our insurers will not deny coverage as to any future claim. In addition, our reliance on the computer systems of various third parties with whom we work, including our CROs and other contractors, introduce new cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, including supply-chain attacks, and other threats to our business operations. We rely on our third-party partners to implement effective security measures and identify and correct for any such failures, deficiencies, cybersecurity incidents or data breaches. However, our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. Any failure by such third parties to prevent or mitigate cybersecurity incidents, data breaches or other improper access to or disclosure of such information could have similarly adverse consequences for us. While we may be entitled to damages if the third parties with whom we work fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award. In addition, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties’ infrastructure in our supply chain or that of the third parties with whom we work have not been compromised. In addition to experiencing a cybersecurity incident or data breach, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive data about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position. Additionally, sensitive data of the Company could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our employees’, personnel’s, or vendors’ use of generative AI technologies. Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a cybersecurity incident, data breach, or other interruption that could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive data or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties with whom we work. A cybersecurity incident, data breach, or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties with whom we work) to provide our services. Risks Related to Government Regulatory and Legal Requirements Disruptions at the FDA, SEC and other U.S. government agencies caused by reduction in staffing, leadership changes, funding shortages or global health concerns could hinder their ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, or otherwise prevent new or modified products from being developed, approved or commercialized in a timely manner or at all, or otherwise prevent those agencies from performing normal business functions on which the operation of business may relay, which could negatively impact our business. Federal agencies in the U.S., including the FDA, the SEC and other comparable regulatory authorities, operate pursuant to annual appropriations and other political and budgetary processes, and may from time to time be subject to continuing resolutions, funding lapses, or other fiscal constraints. Currently, although the FDA and many other federal agencies have funding sufficient to continue their activities through September 30, 2026 (and a bill funding the federal government through December 4, 2026, is currently pending in the U.S. Congress), the timing and amount of future funding is unpredictable. Without appropriation of sufficient funding to federal agencies, our business operations related to our product development activities for the U.S. market could be impacted. The ability of the FDA, EMA, and other comparable regulatory authorities 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, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or other comparable regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and other comparable regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years and may continue to fluctuate as a result of these factors. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other U.S. government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, including executive and congressional priorities, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. For example, the current administration has issued executive orders seeking to greatly reduce the size of the federal workforce, including through layoffs and severance packages offered to employees of federal agencies within the executive branch and independent agencies, including the FDA. Any such reduction in personnel may result in longer review times by the FDA and other agencies. Disruptions at the FDA, the SEC and other agencies, including as a result of substantial leadership changes, personnel cuts, policy changes or otherwise, may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. Changes and cuts in FDA staffing have been reported by some in the pharmaceutical industry as creating delays in the FDA’s responsiveness or in its ability to review submissions or applications, issue regulations or guidance, or implement or enforce regulatory requirements in a timely fashion or at all. Also, state governments may seek to address or react to changes at the federal level with changes to their regulatory frameworks in a manner that could impact our operations. Over the last several years, including from October 1, 2025 to November 12, 2025, the U.S. government shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, have had to furlough critical employees and cease critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs again, or a widespread freeze on federal funding occurs in the future or if global health concerns or staffing changes prevent the FDA, SEC, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, including formal and informal interactions with product developers, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA, SEC, EMA, or other such comparable foreign regulatory authorities to timely review 60 and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, in our operations as a public company, future government shutdowns and/or substantial leadership, personnel, and policy changes at the SEC could impact our business by delaying review of our public filings, which in turn could delay or frustrate our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations or delay the review or effectiveness of required regulatory or securities filings. We may not be able to obtain orphan drug designation or exclusivity for our product candidates for which we seek such a designation or exclusivity, and even if we do, that designation may not provide an expedited development or regulatory review or approval process and any orphan drug exclusivity we may receive for approved products may not prevent the FDA or the EMA from approving other competing products. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a product candidate as an orphan drug if it is intended to treat a rare disease or condition. A similar regulatory scheme governs the designation of orphan product candidates by the EMA in the EU. Generally, if a product with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first regulatory approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA or the EMA (as applicable) from approving another marketing authorization application for another similar product candidate for the same orphan therapeutic indication for that time period. The applicable period is seven years in the United States and ten years in the EU (which can be extended to 12 years if the sponsor complies with an agreed-upon pediatric investigation plan). The exclusivity period in the EU can be reduced to six years if at the end of the fifth year it is determined that a product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, including if the product is sufficiently profitable so that market exclusivity is no longer justified. In order for the FDA to grant orphan drug exclusivity to one of our product candidates, the agency must find that the product candidate is indicated for the treatment of a condition or disease that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or that affects 200,000 or more individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product candidate available for the disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product in the United States. Hypoparathyroidism is a disease that affects approximately 70,000 individuals in the United States, and accordingly, any product candidate we advance forward in development for hypoparathyroidism may qualify for orphan drug designation. However, the FDA may conclude that the condition or disease for which we seek orphan drug exclusivity does not meet this standard. In the EU, a medicinal product may be designated as orphan if (1) it is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects no more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) it is unlikely that the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in its development; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU, or if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. Even if we obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product candidate, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product candidate from competition because different product candidates can be approved for the same condition. In addition, even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA or the EMA can subsequently approve the same product candidate for the same condition if the FDA or EMA (as applicable) concludes that the later product candidate is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care compared with the product that has orphan exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity may also be lost if the FDA or EMA determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the product to meet the needs of the patients with the rare disease or condition. While we may in the future seek designations for our product candidates with the FDA, EMA and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities that are intended to confer benefits such as a faster development process, an accelerated regulatory pathway or regulatory exclusivity, there can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such designations. In addition, even if one or more of our product candidates are granted such designations, we may not be able to realize the intended benefits of such designations. The FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities offer certain designations for product candidates that are designed to encourage the research and development of product candidates that are intended to address conditions with significant unmet medical need. These designations may confer benefits such as additional interaction with regulatory authorities, a potentially accelerated regulatory pathway and priority review. However, there can be no assurance that we will successfully obtain such designations for our product candidates. In addition, while such designations could expedite the development or approval process, they generally do not change the standards for approval. Even if we obtain such designations for our product candidates, there can be no assurance that we will realize their intended benefits. For example, we may seek a Fast Track Designation for one or more of our product candidates. If a product is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need for this condition, the product sponsor may apply for Fast Track Designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure you that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we do receive Fast Track Designation, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA procedures, and a Fast Track Designation does not make approval more likely to occur. The FDA may rescind the Fast Track Designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development activities. 61 In the EU, we may seek to participate in the PRIority MEdicines (“PRIME”) scheme for our potential product candidates. The PRIME scheme is intended to encourage development of product candidates in areas of unmet medical need and provides accelerated assessment of product candidates representing substantial innovation, where the marketing authorization application will be made through the centralized procedure in the EU. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need (i.e., no treatment option exists in the EU or the applicable product candidate can offer a major therapeutic advantage over existing treatments). Many benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with access to the PRIME scheme, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and the possibility of accelerated assessment of a marketing authorization application once a dossier has been submitted. There is no guarantee, however, that our potential product candidates would be deemed eligible for the PRIME scheme and even if we do participate in the PRIME scheme, where during the course of development a product no longer meets the eligibility criteria, support under the PRIME scheme may be withdrawn. PRIME eligibility does not change the standards for product approval, and there is no assurance that any such designation or eligibility will result in expedited review or approval. We may seek Breakthrough Therapy Designation for one or more of our product candidates. A breakthrough therapy is defined as a drug that is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs, to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition, and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. For drugs that have been designated as breakthrough therapies, interaction and communication between the FDA and the sponsor of the trial can help to identify the most efficient path for clinical development while minimizing the number of patients placed in ineffective control regimens. Drugs designated as breakthrough therapies by the FDA are also eligible for accelerated approval and priority review. Designation as a breakthrough therapy is within the discretion of the FDA. Accordingly, even if we believe a product candidate we develop meets the criteria for designation as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may disagree and instead determine not to make such designation. In any event, the receipt of Breakthrough Therapy Designation for a product candidate may not result in a faster development process, review or approval compared to drugs considered for approval under conventional FDA procedures and does not assure ultimate approval by the FDA. In addition, even if any product candidate we develop qualifies as a breakthrough therapy, the FDA may later decide that the drug no longer meets the conditions for qualification and rescind the designation. Even in the absence of obtaining Fast Track and/or Breakthrough Therapy Designations, a sponsor can seek priority review at the time of submitting a marketing application. The FDA may designate a product for priority review if it is a product that treats a serious condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety or effectiveness when compared with other available therapies. Significant improvement may be illustrated by evidence of increased effectiveness in the treatment of a condition, elimination or substantial reduction of a treatment-limiting adverse reaction, documented enhancement of patient compliance that may lead to improvement in serious outcomes, or evidence of safety and effectiveness in a new subpopulation. A priority review designation is intended to direct overall attention and resources to the evaluation of such applications, and to shorten the FDA’s goal for taking action on a marketing application from ten months to six months. Priority review designation may be rescinded if a product no longer meets the qualifying criteria. Where appropriate, we may seek to secure approval from the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities through the use of expedited approval pathways, such as accelerated approval. If we are unable to obtain such approvals, we may be required to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials beyond those that we contemplate, which could increase the expense of obtaining, and delay the receipt of, necessary marketing approvals. Even if we receive accelerated approval from the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, if our confirmatory trials do not verify clinical benefit, or if we do not comply with rigorous post-marketing requirements, the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may seek to withdraw the accelerated approval. Where possible, we plan to pursue accelerated development strategies in areas of high unmet need. We may seek an accelerated approval pathway for one or more of our product candidates from the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Under the accelerated approval provisions in the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, and the FDA’s implementing regulations, the FDA may grant accelerated approval to a product candidate designed to treat a serious or life-threatening condition that provides meaningful therapeutic benefit over available therapies upon a determination that the product candidate has an effect on a surrogate endpoint or intermediate clinical endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit. The FDA considers a clinical benefit to be a positive therapeutic effect that is clinically meaningful in the context of a given disease, such as irreversible morbidity or mortality. For the purposes of accelerated approval, a surrogate endpoint is a marker, such as a laboratory measurement, radiographic image, physical sign, or other measure that is thought to predict clinical benefit, but is not itself a measure of clinical benefit. An intermediate clinical endpoint is a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. The accelerated approval pathway may be used in cases in which the advantage of a new drug over available therapy may not be a direct therapeutic advantage but is a clinically important improvement from a patient and public health perspective. If granted, accelerated approval is usually contingent on the sponsor’s agreement to conduct, in a diligent manner, additional post-approval confirmatory studies to verify and describe the drug’s clinical benefit. Under FDORA, the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that a post-approval confirmatory study or studies be underway prior to approval or within a specified time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. FDORA also gives the FDA increased authority to withdraw approval of a drug or biologic granted accelerated approval on an expedited 62 basis if the sponsor fails to conduct such studies in a timely manner, send status updates on such studies to the FDA every 180 days to be publicly posted by the agency, or if such post-approval studies fail to verify the drug’s predicted clinical benefit. The FDA is empowered to take action, such as issuing fines, against companies that fail to conduct with due diligence any post-approval confirmatory study or submit timely reports to the agency on their progress. Prior to seeking accelerated approval, we would seek feedback from the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities and would otherwise evaluate our ability to seek and receive such accelerated approval. There can be no assurance that after our evaluation of the feedback and other factors we will decide to pursue or submit an NDA or BLA for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval. Similarly, there can be no assurance that after subsequent feedback from the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we will continue to pursue or apply for accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval, even if we initially decide to do so. Furthermore, if we decide to submit an application for accelerated approval, there can be no assurance that such application will be accepted or that any approval will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. The FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities could also require us to conduct further studies prior to considering our application or granting approval of any type, including, for example, if other products are approved via the accelerated pathway and subsequently converted by FDA to full approval. A failure to obtain accelerated approval or any other form of expedited development, review or approval for any of our product candidates would result in a longer time period to commercialization of such product candidate, could increase the cost of development of such product candidate and could harm our competitive position in the marketplace. We are subject to stringent and evolving U.S. and foreign laws, rules, regulations, policies, industry standards, contractual requirements, and other obligations related to data protection, privacy, and security. Our actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could adversely affect our business. We are subject to various data protection, privacy, and security laws, rules, regulations, policies, industry standards, contractual requirements, and other obligations that apply to our collection, transmission, storage, use, disclosure, transfer, maintenance and other processing of sensitive information, including personal data. The legislative and regulatory landscape for data protection, privacy, and security continues to evolve across jurisdictions worldwide. For example, in the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data protection, privacy, and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). At the federal level, regulations promulgated pursuant to the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”), as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and implementing regulations, establish stringent privacy and security standards that limit the use and disclosure of individually identifiable health information, or protected health information, and require the implementation of administrative, physical and technological safeguards to protect the privacy of protected health information and ensure the confidentiality, integrity and availability of electronic protected health information. Further, failing to take appropriate steps to keep consumers’ personal information secure may constitute unfair acts or practices in or affecting commerce in violation of Section 5(a) of the Federal Trade Commission (“FTC”) Act, 15 U.S.C § 45(a). The FTC expects a company’s data security measures to be reasonable and appropriate in light of the sensitivity and volume of consumer information it holds, the size and complexity of its business and the cost of available tools to improve security and reduce vulnerabilities. Regulators and legislators in the U.S. are also increasingly scrutinizing and restricting certain personal data transfers and transactions involving foreign countries. For example, the Department of Justice’s January 8, 2025, rule on “Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons,” prohibits data brokerage and data sharing transactions involving certain sensitive personal data categories, including health data, genetic data, and biospecimens, to countries of concern, including China. The regulations also restrict certain investment agreements, employment agreements and vendor agreements involving such data and countries of concern, absent specified cybersecurity controls. Actual or alleged violations of these regulations may be punishable by criminal and/or civil sanctions, and may result in exclusion from participation in federal and state programs. Data protection, privacy, and security obligations remain an evolving landscape at both the domestic and foreign level, with new laws, rules and regulations coming into effect, posing continued legal and compliance challenges. For example, as of January 2026, twenty U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to conduct our operations. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, in California, the California Consumer Privacy Act, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (collectively, “CCPA”), provides for fines of up to $7,500 per intentional violation and allows privacy litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. The CCPA and other comprehensive U.S. state privacy laws exempt some data processed in the context of clinical trials, but these developments may further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us, the third parties with whom we work. 63 The existence of comprehensive privacy laws in different states adds additional complexity, variation in requirements, processing restrictions and potential legal risk, requiring additional investment of resources in our compliance programs. These laws may also impact our business strategies, result in increased compliance costs and/or changes to our business practices and policies and increase the likelihood that we may be subject to enforcement actions or otherwise incur liability for noncompliance. Several states are also specifically regulating consumer health information. For example, Washington has enacted a consumer health privacy law, the My Health My Data Act (“WMHMDA”), which went into effect on March 31, 2024 and regulates the collection and sharing of consumer health information. WMHMDA places restrictions on processing consumer health data (including imposing stringent requirements for consents), provides consumers certain rights with respect to their health data, and creates a private right of action to allow individuals to sue for violations of the law, which further increases the relevant compliance risk. Connecticut and Nevada have also passed similar laws regulating consumer health data. In addition, other states have proposed and/or passed legislation that regulates the privacy and/or security of certain specific types of information. For example, a small number of states, including Illinois and Texas, have passed laws that regulate biometric data specifically. These various privacy and security laws may impact our business activities, including our identification of research subjects, relationships with business partners and ultimately the marketing and distribution of our products. State laws are changing rapidly and there have been discussions in the U.S. Congress of new comprehensive federal data privacy laws to which we could become subject to, if enacted. Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards govern data protection, privacy, and security. For example, if we conduct clinical trials in the European Economic Area (“EEA”) and/or the United Kingdom (“U.K.”), we may become subject to additional privacy laws in those jurisdictions, such as the EU General Data Protection Regulation (“EU GDPR”) and the EU GDPR as incorporated into the laws of the U.K (“U.K. GDPR” and, together with the EU GDPR, “GDPR”), both of which impose strict requirements for processing personal data. The GDPR is wide-ranging in scope and imposes numerous requirements on companies that process personal data, including requirements relating to having a legal basis or condition for processing personal data, stricter requirements relating to the processing of sensitive data (such as health data), where required by the GDPR obtaining consent of the individuals to whom the personal data relates, providing information to individuals regarding data processing activities, implementing safeguards to protect the security and confidentiality of personal data, providing notification of data breaches, requiring data protection impact assessments for high risk processing and taking certain measures when engaging third-party processors. Under the GDPR, data protection authorities may impose large penalties for violations of the GDPR, including potential fines of up to €20 million (£17.5 million GBP) or 4% of annual global revenues, whichever is greater. The GDPR also confers a private right of action on data subjects and consumer associations to lodge complaints with supervisory authorities, seek judicial remedies, and obtain compensation for damages resulting from violations of the GDPR. Non-compliance could also result in the imposition of orders to stop data processing activities, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial position, and results of operations. In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from the EEA, U.K., and other jurisdictions to the U.S. or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Although there are various mechanisms that may be used in some cases to lawfully transfer personal data to the U.S. or other countries, these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges and may not always be available to us. For example, the GDPR requires certain adequate safeguards to enable the transfer of personal data outside of the EEA or the U.K., in particular to the U.S., such as the EU standard contractual clauses, U.K. International Data Transfer Addendum/Agreement, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework (“Framework”) and the U.K. extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework). However, these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the U.S. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the U.K. or other jurisdictions to the U.S., or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Although the U.K. is regarded as a third country under the EU GDPR, the European Commission has issued a decision recognizing the U.K. as providing adequate protection under the EU GDPR, or the Adequacy Decision, and, therefore, transfers of personal data originating in the EEA to the U.K. remain unrestricted. In December 2025, the European Commission adopted a decision to extend the validity of the U.K. Adequacy Decision for six years until December 2031, determining that the U.K. continues to offer a level of data protection that is “essentially equivalent” to the EU standards. This follows the U.K.’s adoption of the Data (Use and Access) Act 2025 on June 19, 2025. The U.K. government has confirmed that personal data transfers from the U.K. to the EEA remain free flowing. The respective provisions and enforcement of the EU GDPR and U.K. GDPR may further diverge in the future and create additional regulatory challenges and uncertainties. This lack of clarity on future U.K. laws and regulations and their interaction with EU laws and regulations could add legal risk, complexity and cost to our handling of personal data and our privacy and data security compliance programs and could require us to implement different compliance measures for the U.K. and the EEA. In the EEA, the NIS 2 Directive (“NIS 2”) is replacing the cybersecurity legal framework under the current NIS framework, aiming to ensure a high level of cybersecurity in the region. NIS 2 brings new medium and large organizations providing services in the 64 EEA within scope of the legal framework. It extends to additional sectors and expands the list of in-scope healthcare organizations, including to certain providers engaged in research and development of medicinal products. The new regime imposes direct obligations on management in respect of an in-scope organization's compliance with NIS 2, requires covered organizations to put in place certain cyber risk management measures, strengthens incident reporting requirements and provides supervisory authorities with a greater oversight. The majority of obligations will come into force when national legislation implementing NIS 2 becomes effective in the relevant EU Member State. EU Member States had until October 17, 2024 to transpose NIS 2 into national legislation, although some countries have still not completed the transposition. As such, the cybersecurity regulatory landscape in the EU is currently fragmented and uncertain. To the extent we are subject to NIS 2, we will require additional investment of our resources in compliance programs. Under NIS 2 companies may be subject to administrative fines of up to the higher amount of €10 million or 2% of worldwide turnover. Furthermore, if we fail, or are perceived to have failed, to comply with applicable data protection, privacy, and security laws, including applicable HIPAA privacy and security standards, we could face significant administrative, civil and criminal penalties. For example, HHS has the discretion to impose significant penalties, and such enforcement activity can result in financial liability and reputational harm, and responses to such enforcement activity can consume significant internal resources. In addition, state attorneys general are authorized to bring civil actions seeking either injunctions or damages in response to violations that threaten the data protection, privacy, or security of the personal data of state residents. We cannot be sure how these laws, rules and regulations will be interpreted, enforced, or applied to our operations. In addition to the risks associated with enforcement activities and potential contractual liabilities, our ongoing efforts to comply with evolving laws, rules and regulations at the international, federal and state level may be costly and require ongoing modifications to our policies, procedures and systems. Additionally, we rely on certain third-party vendors to process certain confidential, sensitive, or personal data on our behalf. Failure by us or our third-party vendors to comply with any of these laws, rules, regulations, contractual requirements, industry standards, or other obligations could result in notification obligations, enforcement actions, regulatory investigations or inquiries, significant fines, imprisonment of company officials and public censure, litigation and claims for damages by affected individuals, customers or business partners, damage to our reputation and loss of goodwill, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. Our employees and personnel use generative artificial intelligence technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in generative artificial intelligence technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Our use of new and evolving technologies, such as artificial intelligence, may present risks and challenges that can impact our business, including by posing cybersecurity and other risks to our confidential and/or proprietary information, including personal information, and as a result we may be exposed to reputational harm and liability. We, and our third-party vendors, may use and integrate AI into our business processes both in our own development and implementation of AI as well as through the adoption of commercially available tools. Use of this technology could pose cybersecurity, data privacy, IT, intellectual property, regulatory, legal, operational, competitive, reputational and other risks and challenges that could affect our business. Specifically, risks related to accuracy, bias, AI hallucinations, discrimination, harmful content, misinformation, fraud, scams, targeted attacks (including model poisoning or data poisoning), surveillance, data leakage, inequality, environmental harms, and other harms may flow from our development, use, or deployment of AI technologies. If we enable or use solutions that draw controversy due to perceived or actual negative societal impact, we may also experience brand or reputational harm, competitive harm or legal liability. A growing number of legislators and regulators are adopting laws and regulations and have focused enforcement efforts on the adoption of AI, and use of such technologies in compliance with ethical standards and societal expectations. These developments may increase our compliance burden and costs in connection with use of AI and lead to legal liability if we fail to meet evolving legal standards or if use of such technologies results in harms or other causes of action we did not predict. For example, the EU’s Artificial Intelligence Act (“AI Act”) entered into force on August 1, 2024. Certain provisions have already become applicable, including the prohibition on certain AI practices and obligations relating to general-purpose AI models. Most of the remaining provisions became applicable beginning on August 2, 2026, although the application of certain rules for high-risk AI systems has been deferred until December 2, 2027 (or, for certain product-embedded AI systems, deferred until August 2, 2028). As currently enacted, the AI Act, which may be amended as part of the EU’s Digital Omnibus, imposes significant obligations on providers and deployers of AI systems, and encourages providers and deployers of AI systems to account for EU ethical principles in their development and use of these systems. The scope of requirements depends on legal and risk determinations that rely on novel legal provisions that have not yet been interpreted by courts or regulators, and non-compliance can lead to significant fines. In the United States, the AI regulatory environment is complex and uncertain. Over the past year, states have advanced, and in some cases passed, dozens of laws focusing on AI governance and regulation, including on deployment of AI in healthcare settings. At the federal level, the current administration has endorsed a federal moratorium on the enforcement of state AI laws, including through a December 2025 executive order titled “Ensuring a National Policy Framework for Artificial Intelligence.” So far, these efforts have not been successful at curtailing state action on AI regulation, contributing to a complicated legislative patchwork, which may be litigated in state and federal courts. In addition, various federal regulators have issued guidance and focused enforcement efforts on the use of AI in regulated sectors. The FDA, for example, issued guidance on the use of AI in medical devices, requiring detailed risk management 65 and review processes to obtain approvals. If we develop or use AI systems governed by these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, monitoring and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements, with the potential for significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance. The rapid evolution of AI will require the application of significant resources to design, develop, test and maintain such systems to help ensure that AI is implemented in accordance with applicable law and regulation and in a socially responsible manner and to minimize any real or perceived unintended harmful impacts. The use of certain AI technologies can also give rise to intellectual property risks, including by disclosing or otherwise compromising our confidential or proprietary intellectual property, or by undermining our ability to assert or defend ownership rights in intellectual property created with the assistance of AI tools. Our vendors may in turn incorporate AI tools into their offerings, and the providers of these AI tools may not meet existing or rapidly evolving regulatory or industry standards, including with respect to privacy and data security. Further, bad actors around the world use increasingly sophisticated methods, including the use of AI, to engage in illegal activities involving the theft and misuse of personal information, confidential information and intellectual property. In addition, the use of generative AI models in our internal or third-party systems may create new attack surfaces or methods for adversaries, which could impact us and our vendors. Any of these effects could damage our reputation, result in the loss of valuable property and information, cause us to breach applicable laws and regulations, and adversely impact our business. All of these compliance and operational requirements impose significant costs, such as costs related to organizational changes, implementing additional protection technologies, training employees and engaging consultants and legal advisors, which are likely to increase over time. Our efforts to comply with the evolving data protection, privacy, AI and security laws, rules, regulations, and other obligations may be unsuccessful. We may need to devote significant resources to understanding and complying with this changing landscape. In addition, such requirements may require us to modify our data processing practices and policies, utilize management’s time and/or divert resources from other initiatives and projects. Any actual or perceived failure by us or our third-party partners to comply with such laws, rules, regulations, and other obligations regarding data protection, privacy, AI and security could result in significant government-imposed fines or orders requiring that we change our practices, claims for damages or other liabilities, regulatory investigations and enforcement action, litigation and significant costs for remediation, any of which could adversely affect our business. Even if we are not determined to have violated these laws, rules or regulations, government investigations into these issues typically require the expenditure of significant resources and generate negative publicity. Further, any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. Additionally, the hardware, software, data and cloud computing platforms that we rely on may not continue to be available at reasonable prices, on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Any loss of the right to use any of these hardware, software, data or cloud computing platforms could significantly increase our expenses and disrupt or otherwise result in delays in the provisioning of our services until equivalent technology is either developed by us, or, if available, is identified, obtained through purchase or license and integrated into our services, and no assurance can be provided that such equivalent technology would be developed or obtained in a timely manner or at all. Moreover, as a result of the increasing use and deployment of AI technologies, infrastructure capacity requirements, including network capacity and computing power and energy requirements, may increase which could lead to an increase in service interruptions we experience. Healthcare legislative reform measures may have a negative impact on our business and results of operations. In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and continue to be, several legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect our ability to profitably sell any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. For more information, see the section titled “Business–Government Regulation–Current and Future U.S. Healthcare Reform” in the 2025 Annual Report. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act was passed, which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers, and significantly impacts the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of healthcare services to contain or reduce costs of healthcare may adversely affect: •the demand for any of our product candidates, if approved; •the ability to set a price that we believe is fair for any of our product candidates, if approved; •our ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability; •the level of taxes that we are required to pay; and 66 •the availability of capital. Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical and biologic products. In addition, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. In August 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law. The IRA includes several provisions that may impact our business, depending on how various aspects of the IRA are implemented. Provisions that may impact our business include a $2,000 out-of-pocket cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries, the imposition of new manufacturer financial liability on most drugs in Medicare Part D, permitting the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D pricing for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition, requiring companies to pay rebates to Medicare for drug prices that increase faster than inflation, and delay until January 1, 2032 the implementation of the HHS rebate rule that would have limited the fees that pharmacy benefit managers can charge. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs are exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program, but only if they have one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product receives multiple orphan designations or has multiple approved indications, it may not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation challenging the constitutionality of the IRA’s Medicare drug price negotiation program. The effects of the IRA on our business and the healthcare industry in general is not yet known. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the marketing approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent marketing approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements. We cannot predict what healthcare reform initiatives may be adopted in the future. We expect that these and other healthcare reform measures that may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved drug. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability, or commercialize our drugs. Our relationships with customers, physicians, and third-party payors may be subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, other healthcare laws and regulations and health data privacy and security laws and regulations, contractual obligations and self-regulatory schemes. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties. Healthcare providers and third-party payors in the United States and elsewhere will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any product candidates for which we obtain marketing approval. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare professionals, principal investigators, consultants, customers and third-party payors may subject us to various federal and state fraud and abuse laws and other healthcare laws, including, without limitation, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, the federal civil and criminal false claims laws and the law commonly referred to as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act and regulations. These laws will impact, among other things, our clinical research, as well as our proposed sales and marketing programs. In addition, we may be subject to health information privacy and security laws by the federal government, the states and other jurisdictions in which we may conduct our business. For more information, see the section titled “Business–Government Regulation–Other Healthcare Laws” in the 2025 Annual Report. Because of the breadth of these laws and the limited statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors available, it is possible that some of our business activities could be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. Efforts to ensure that our business arrangements with third parties will comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. Any action against us for violation of these laws, 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. The shifting compliance environment and the need to build and maintain robust and expandable systems to comply with multiple jurisdictions with different compliance and/or reporting requirements increases the possibility that a healthcare company may run afoul of one or more of the requirements. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of these laws or any other governmental regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations. 67 Legislation or other changes in U.S. tax law may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition, or results of operations. The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. For example, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (“H.R.1”) was signed into law on July 4, 2025 and made significant changes to U.S. federal tax law. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application) could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. For example, under Section 174 of the Code, in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed outside the U.S. will be capitalized and amortized, which may have an adverse effect on our cash flow. H.R.1 provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed in the U.S. may, at the taxpayer’s election, be immediately deducted or capitalized and amortized. In addition, H.R.1 provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021 and before January 1, 2025, certain eligible taxpayers generally may elect to retroactively deduct expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years by filing amended tax returns for such taxable years, and all other taxpayers that are not eligible to make such an election and that amortized expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years generally may elect to accelerate and deduct the remaining unamortized amounts of such research and development expenses (i) in the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024, or (ii) ratably over the two-taxable year period beginning with the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024. In recent years, many changes have been made to applicable tax laws and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. Future changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. It cannot be predicted whether, when, in what form, or with what effective dates, new tax laws may be enacted, or regulations and rulings may be enacted, promulgated or issued under existing or new tax laws, which could result in an increase in our or our stockholders’ tax liability or require changes in the manner in which we operate in order to minimize or mitigate any adverse effects of changes in tax law or in the interpretation thereof. We urge investors to consult with their legal and tax advisers regarding the implications of potential changes in tax laws on an investment in our common stock. A decline in the federal budget, changes in spending or budgetary priorities of the U.S. government, a prolonged U.S. government shutdown or delays in contract awards may significantly and adversely affect our future revenues, cash flow and financial results. In recent years, U.S. government appropriations have been affected by larger U.S. government budgetary issues and related legislation. As a result, the Department of Defense funding levels have fluctuated and have been difficult to predict. Future spending levels are subject to a wide range of factors, including Congressional action. In addition, in the past, U.S. debt ceiling and budget deficit concerns have increased the possibility of additional credit-rating downgrades and economic slowdowns, or a recession in the U.S. Although U.S. lawmakers passed legislation to raise the federal debt ceiling on multiple occasions, ratings agencies have lowered or threatened to lower the long-term sovereign credit rating on the U.S. The impact of this or any further downgrades to the U.S. government’s sovereign credit rating or its perceived creditworthiness could adversely affect the U.S. and global financial markets and economic conditions. As a result, government spending levels are difficult to predict beyond the near term due to numerous factors, including the external threat environment, future government priorities and the state of government finances. Significant changes in government spending or changes in U.S. government priorities, policies and requirements could have a material adverse effect on our results of operations, financial condition or liquidity. We are subject to U.S. and certain foreign export and import controls, sanctions, embargoes, anti-corruption laws, and anti-money laundering laws and regulations. Compliance with these legal standards could hinder our ability to compete in certain markets. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm our business. Our operations are subject to U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions and other trade laws and regulations. Anti-corruption laws generally prohibit us and our employees, officers, CROs, consultants, contractors and other partners and agents from authorizing, promising, offering, providing, soliciting, or receiving, directly or indirectly, corrupt or improper payments or anything else of value to or from recipients in the public or private sector. We have direct or indirect interactions with officials and employees of government agencies or government-affiliated hospitals, universities and other organizations. We also expect our non-U.S. activities to increase over time. We expect to rely on third parties for research, preclinical studies and clinical trials and/or to obtain necessary permits, licenses, patent registrations and other marketing approvals. We can be held liable for the corrupt or other illegal activities of our personnel, agents, or partners, even if we do not explicitly authorize or have prior knowledge of such activities. We are also subject to U.S. and foreign export controls, trade sanctions, and import laws and regulations. Such laws may prevent or prohibit the export or provision of certain products and services to countries, governments, and persons targeted by sanctions. Violations of these above laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences. 68 Risks Related to Third Party Relationships We currently rely on, and may continue to depend on, collaborations with third parties for the discovery, development and commercialization of our product candidates. If any of these collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of those product candidates. We have a third-party collaborator for research, development and commercialization of some of our product candidates, and we may seek third-party collaborators in the future. Pharmaceutical companies are our prior and likely future collaborators for any marketing, distribution, development, licensing or broader collaboration arrangements. If we fail to maintain our existing collaboration or fail to enter into future collaborations on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or if such collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to execute our strategy to develop certain targets, product candidates or disease areas that we believe could benefit from the resources of either larger pharmaceutical companies or those specialized in a particular area of relevance. For example, in May 2025, we entered into the Collaboration Agreement with Novo. Under the Novo Collaboration Agreement, we and Novo are exclusively collaborating to leverage our proprietary Native Complex Platform® to discover, develop and commercialize multiple potential oral small molecule therapies for metabolic-related diseases based on certain specified molecular targets. The collaboration objective is to discover and develop several novel mono-, dual-, or triple-acting oral small molecule drug candidates directed across five Collaboration Targets. The collaboration includes our most advanced preclinical metabolic program focused on developing an oral small molecule agonist to the GIP receptor. We and Novo have initially commenced four simultaneous research and development programs, with each pursuing one or more Collaboration Targets from discovery through development candidate selection. Failure by Novo to meet its obligations under the Novo Collaboration Agreement, to apply sufficient efforts at developing and commercializing licensed products, or to comply with applicable legal or regulatory requirements, may materially adversely affect our business and our results of operations. With respect to our collaboration agreements, we have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our collaborators dedicate to the development or commercialization of our product candidates. Moreover, our ability to generate revenues from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. Collaborations involving our product candidates may pose the following risks to us: •collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations; •collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on preclinical studies or clinical trial results, changes in the collaborators’ strategic focus or available funding, or external factors such as an acquisition that diverts resources or creates competing priorities; •collaborators may delay clinical trials, provide insufficient funding for a clinical trial program, stop a clinical trial or abandon a product candidate, repeat or conduct new clinical trials or require a new formulation of a product candidate for clinical testing; •collaborators could independently develop, or develop with third parties, products that compete directly or indirectly with our product candidates if the collaborators believe that competitive products are more likely to be successfully developed or can be commercialized under terms that are more economically attractive than ours; •collaborators with marketing and distribution rights to one or more products may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of such product or products; •collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information in such a way as to invite litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to litigation or potential liability; •collaborators may infringe the intellectual property rights of third parties, which may expose us to litigation and potential liability; •disputes may arise between the collaborators and us that result in the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our product candidates or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources; and •collaborations may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable product candidates. As a result of the foregoing, our existing collaboration or any future collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of our product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all. If a current or future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program 69 could be delayed, diminished or terminated. Any failure to successfully develop or commercialize our product candidates pursuant to any current or future collaboration agreements could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, to the extent that any of our current or future collaborators were to terminate a collaboration agreement, we may be forced to independently develop these product candidates, including funding preclinical studies or clinical trials, assuming marketing and distribution costs and defending intellectual property rights, or, in certain instances, abandon product candidates altogether, any of which could result in a change to our business plan and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We rely on third-party manufacturers, CROs, CMOs, and suppliers to supply, develop and test components of our product candidates. The loss of our third-party manufacturers, CROs, CMOs, or suppliers, their failure to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or to supply sufficient quantities at acceptable quality levels or prices, or at all, or changes in methods of product candidate manufacturing, development or formulation would materially and adversely affect our business. We do not own or operate facilities for drug manufacturing, storage, distribution or quality testing. We currently rely, and may continue to rely, on third-party contract manufacturers, including in China, to manufacture and test bulk drug substances, drug products, raw materials, samples, components, or other materials and reports. Reliance on third-party manufacturers may expose us to different risks than if we were to manufacture product candidates ourselves. There can be no assurance that our preclinical and clinical development product supplies will not be limited, interrupted, terminated or of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. In addition, any replacement of our manufacturer could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. The manufacturing process for a product candidate is subject to FDA, EMA and foreign regulatory authority review. In some cases, we, and our suppliers and manufacturers, some of which may be our sole source of supply, must meet applicable manufacturing requirements and undergo rigorous facility and process validation tests required by regulatory authorities in order to comply with regulatory standards, such as cGMPs. Securing marketing approval also requires the submission of information about the product manufacturing process to, and inspection of manufacturing facilities by, the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities. If our contract manufacturers cannot successfully manufacture material that conforms to our specifications and the strict regulatory requirements of the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, we may not be able to rely on their manufacturing facilities for the manufacture of elements of our product candidates. Moreover, we do not control the manufacturing process at our contract manufacturers and are completely dependent on them for compliance with current regulatory requirements. In the event that any of our manufacturers fails to comply with such requirements or to perform its obligations in relation to quality, timing, or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, we may be forced to enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, if at all. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such to another third party. These factors would increase our reliance on such manufacturer or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturer in order to enable us, or to have another third party, manufacture our product candidates. If we are required to change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines; and we may be required to repeat some of the development program. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget. We expect to continue to rely on third-party manufacturers if we receive regulatory approval for any product candidate. To the extent that we have existing, or enter into future, manufacturing arrangements with third parties, we will depend on these third parties to perform their obligations in a timely manner consistent with contractual and regulatory requirements, including those related to quality control and assurance. Any manufacturing facilities used to produce our products will be subject to periodic review and inspection by the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities, including for continued compliance with cGMP requirements, quality control, quality assurance and corresponding maintenance of records and documents. If we are unable to obtain or maintain third-party manufacturing for product candidates, or to do so on commercially reasonable terms, we may not be able to develop and commercialize our product candidates successfully. Our or a third party’s failure to execute on our manufacturing requirements, comply with cGMPs or maintain a compliance status acceptable to the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities could adversely affect our business in a number of ways, including: •delay in the progress on certain research programs; •an inability to initiate or continue clinical trials of product candidates under development; •delay in submitting regulatory applications, or receiving regulatory approvals, for product candidates; •loss of the cooperation of existing or future collaborators; •subjecting third-party manufacturing facilities to additional inspections by regulatory authorities; 70 •requirements to cease distribution or to recall batches of our product candidates; and •in the event of approval to market and commercialize a product candidate, an inability to meet commercial demands for our therapeutics. Additionally, our contract manufacturers may experience manufacturing difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of labor disputes or unstable political environments. If our contract manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, our ability to provide our product candidates to patients in preclinical and clinical trials, or to provide product for treatment of patients once approved, would be jeopardized. In addition, we currently rely on foreign CROs and CMOs, including WuXi AppTec (Hong Kong) Limited, for manufacturing and development activities and will likely continue to rely on foreign CROs and CMOs in the future. Foreign CMOs may be subject to U.S. legislation, sanctions, trade restrictions and other foreign regulatory requirements which could increase the cost or reduce the supply of material available to us, delay the procurement or supply of such material or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure significant commitments from governments to purchase our potential therapies. For example, the BIOSECURE Act passed in December 2025 prohibits U.S. federal agencies from entering into or renewing a contract with any company that uses biotechnology equipment or services produced or provided by a “biotechnology company of concern” in the performance of that contract. It also prohibits loans or grant funding from U.S. federal agencies to entities that use any biotechnology equipment or services produced or provided by a “biotechnology company of concern” in the performance of the government grant or loan. As the BIOSECURE Act is recently enacted, the full effects on our industry is unknown; however, it could have the downstream effect of restricting the ability of pharmaceutical companies that enter into contracts with or receive funding from U.S. federal agencies from purchasing services or equipment from certain Chinese biotechnology companies as well as supply chain disruptions or delays. As passed in December 2025, the BIOSECURE Act did not name WuXi Biologics or WuXi AppTec as “biotechnology companies of concern”; however, under the final version, each biotechnology company that is identified by the Department of Defense as a “Chinese military company” on its so-called “1260H list” (named after Section 1260H of the NDAA for Fiscal Year 2021) will also be designated a “Biotechnology Company of Concern” (BCC) for purposes of the BIOSECURE Act. On June 6, 2026, the Department of Defense added WuXi AppTec to its Section 1260H list, wherein formal designation of WuXi AppTec as a BCC under the BIOSECURE Act will occur once the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (“OMB”) publishes the final BCC list, which is scheduled to be published no later than December 18, 2026. Once the OMB publishes this list, implementing guidance must then be issued, and the Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) Council must implement the BIOSECURE Act’s procurement and funding restrictions. Only sixty days after the FAR Council updates those regulations will the statutory prohibitions on federal contracts, grants, and loans take effect. The Director of OMB will thereafter review and update its BCC list at least annually, based on recommendations from those key federal Secretaries and Directors. To the extent WuXi Biologics, WuXi AppTec or other contractors we use are designated as a BCC or if we have an existing contract with a company subsequently added to the BCC list, a grandfathering provision contained within the BIOSECURE Act may allow us adequate time to identify and execute agreements with alternative contractors if necessary (although there is no guarantee the terms under which we would engage an alternative contractor would be favorable, nor is it certain how the government interprets or implements the grandfathering provision of the BIOSECURE Act). Depending on how the BIOSECURE Act is interpreted by U.S. federal agencies, or whether the BIOSECURE Act is subsequently amended, we could be potentially restricted from pursuing U.S. federal government business or government reimbursement for our products in the future if we continue to use WuXi AppTec or other suppliers or partners identified as a BCC beyond this grandfathering period. In addition to the BIOSECURE Act, any additional executive action, legislative action, or potential sanctions with China could materially impact our work with WuXi AppTec. U.S. executive agencies have the ability to designate entities and individuals on various governmental prohibited and restricted parties lists. Depending on the designation, potential consequences can range from a comprehensive prohibition on all transactions or dealings with designated parties, or a limited prohibition on certain types of activities, such as exports and financing activities, with designated parties. For example, the pharmaceutical industry in China is strictly regulated by the Chinese government. Changes to Chinese regulations or government policies affecting pharmaceutical companies are unpredictable and may have a material adverse effect on our collaborators in China which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Evolving changes in China’s public health, economic, political, and social conditions and the uncertainty around China’s relationship with other governments, such as the U.S. and the United Kingdom, or U.K., could also negatively impact our ability to manufacture our product candidates for our planned clinical trials or have an adverse effect on our ability to secure government funding, which could adversely affect our financial condition and cause us to delay our clinical development programs. Any of the foregoing factors could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, or financial condition. Furthermore, as product candidates progress through preclinical and clinical trials to marketing approval and commercialization, it is common that various aspects of the development program, such as manufacturing methods and formulation, are altered along the way in an effort to optimize yield and manufacturing batch size, minimize costs and achieve consistent quality and results. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve these intended objectives. Any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of clinical trials conducted with the altered materials. This could delay completion of clinical trials, 71 require the conduct of bridging clinical trials or the repetition of one or more clinical trials, increase clinical trial costs, delay approval of our product candidates and jeopardize our ability to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, and generate revenue. We have entered into a collaboration agreement, and may in the future enter into additional collaboration agreements and strategic alliances to maximize the potential of our structure-based drug discovery platform and product candidates, and we may not realize the anticipated benefits of such collaborations or alliances. We expect to form collaborations in the future with respect to our product candidates, but may be unable to do so or to realize the potential benefits of such transactions, which may cause us to alter or delay our development and commercialization plans. Part of our business strategy is to explore additional collaborations with third parties to further utilize our platform capabilities on additional novel GPCR targets and to leverage partners additional disease biology understanding, development and commercial expertise, regional insights or other complementary capabilities to existing or future Septerna programs. We have therefore entered into the Novo Collaboration Agreement and may form or seek further strategic alliances, create joint ventures or collaborations, or enter into additional licensing arrangements with third parties that we believe will complement or augment our development and commercialization efforts with respect to our structure-based drug discovery platform or our product candidates that we may develop. These transactions can entail numerous operational and financial risks, including exposure to unknown liabilities, disruption of our business and diversion of our management’s time and attention in order to manage a collaboration or develop acquired products, product candidates or technologies, incurrence of substantial debt or dilutive issuances of equity securities to pay transaction consideration or costs, higher than expected collaboration, acquisition or integration costs, write-downs of assets or goodwill or impairment charges, increased amortization expenses, difficulty and cost in facilitating the collaboration or combining the operations and personnel of any acquired business, impairment of relationships with key suppliers, manufacturers or customers of any acquired business due to changes in management and ownership and the inability to retain key employees of any acquired business. As a result, if we enter into acquisition or license agreements or strategic partnerships, we may not be able to realize the benefit of such transactions if we are unable to successfully integrate them with our existing operations and company culture. We also cannot be certain that, following a strategic transaction or license, we will achieve the revenue or other anticipated benefits that led us to enter into the arrangement. Research and development collaborations are subject to numerous risks, which may include the following: •collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to a collaboration, and may not commit sufficient efforts and resources, or may misapply those efforts and resources causing delays or termination of the research; •collaborators may not pursue development and commercialization of our structure-based drug discovery platform or collaboration product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on clinical trial results or changes in their strategic focus; •collaborators may delay, provide insufficient resources to, or modify or stop clinical trials for collaboration product candidates; •collaborators could develop or acquire products outside of the collaboration that compete directly or indirectly with our products or product candidates; •collaborators may not properly maintain or defend our intellectual property rights or may use our intellectual property or proprietary information in a way that gives rise to actual or threatened litigation that could jeopardize or invalidate our intellectual property or proprietary information or expose us to potential liability; •disputes may arise between us and a collaborator that cause the delay or termination of the research, development or commercialization of our product candidates, or that result in costly litigation or arbitration that diverts management attention and resources; •collaborations may be terminated and, if terminated, may result in a need for additional capital and personnel to pursue further development or commercialization of our structure-based drug discovery platform or the applicable product candidates; and •collaborators may own or co-own intellectual property covering our products that results from our collaborating with them, and in such cases, we may not have the exclusive right to commercialize such intellectual property. In addition, we could face significant competition in seeking appropriate strategic partners and the negotiation process is time-consuming, expensive, and complex. We may not be successful in our efforts to establish a strategic partnership or other alternative arrangements for our structure-based drug discovery platform or product candidates because they may be deemed to be at too early of a stage of development for collaborative effort and third parties may not view our product candidates as having the requisite potential to demonstrate their desired safety and efficacy profile. If and when we collaborate with a third party for development and commercialization of a product candidate, we can expect to relinquish some or all of the control over the future success of that product candidate to the third party. Our ability to reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed 72 collaborator’s evaluation of our technologies, product candidates and market opportunities. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. We may also be restricted under any license agreements from entering into additional agreements on certain terms or at all with other potential collaborators. As a result of these risks, we may not be able to realize the benefit of any future collaborations or licensing agreements we may enter into. In addition, we may face regulatory obstacles in completing such transactions. If we are unable to do so, we may have to curtail the development of such product candidate, reduce or delay one or more of our other development programs, delay the potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any planned sales or marketing activities for such product candidate, or increase our expenditures and undertake development, manufacturing or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development, manufacturing or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our structure-based drug discovery platform or product candidates or bring them to market and generate revenue. Additionally, we may sometimes collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development under written agreements with these institutions. If collaborations occur, these institutions often provide us with an option to negotiate a license to any of the institution’s rights in technology resulting from the collaboration. Regardless of such option, we may be unable to negotiate a license within the specified timeframe or under terms that are acceptable to us. If we are unable to do so, the institution may offer the intellectual property rights to other parties, potentially blocking our ability to pursue our program. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property or to maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of such program and our business and financial condition could suffer. Our products require specific constituents to work effectively and efficiently, and rights to those constituents are, and in the future may be, held by others. We may also seek to in-license third-party technologies to enhance our Native Complex Platform®. We may be unable to in-license any rights from constituents, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, which could harm our business. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology in order to establish or maintain our competitive position in the market. Any delays in entering into new collaborations or strategic partnership agreements related to our product candidates or our structure-based drug discovery platform could delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates in certain geographies or limit our ability to discover and develop new product candidates, which could harm our business prospects, financial condition, and results of operations. The manufacturing of our product candidates is complex, and our third-party manufacturers may encounter difficulties in production. If we or any of our third-party manufacturers encounter such difficulties, our ability to provide supply of our product candidates for clinical trials, our ability to obtain marketing approval, or our ability to provide patients supply of our products, if approved, could be delayed or stopped. The process of manufacturing pharmaceuticals is complex, time-consuming, highly regulated and subject to multiple risks. Our contract manufacturers must comply with legal requirements, cGMPs and guidelines for the manufacturing of pharmaceuticals used in clinical trials and, if approved, marketed products. Our contract manufacturers may have limited experience in the manufacturing of cGMP batches. Manufacturing pharmaceuticals is highly susceptible to product loss due to contamination, equipment failure, improper installation or operation of equipment, vendor or operator error, inconsistency in yields, variability in product characteristics and difficulties in scaling the production process. Even minor deviations from normal manufacturing processes could result in reduced production yields, product defects and other supply disruptions. If microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered at our third-party manufacturers’ facilities, such facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination, which could delay clinical trials and adversely harm our business. In addition, there are risks associated with large scale manufacturing for clinical trials or commercial scale including, among others, cost overruns, potential problems with process scale-up, process reproducibility, stability issues, compliance with cGMPs, lot consistency and timely availability of raw materials. Even if we or our future collaborators obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, there is no assurance that manufacturers will be able to manufacture the approved product to specifications acceptable to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, to produce it in sufficient quantities to meet the requirements for the potential launch of the product or to meet potential future demand. If manufacturers are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization, commercialization efforts would be impaired, which would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 73 Scaling up a pharmaceutical manufacturing process is a difficult and uncertain task, and our third-party manufacturers may not have the necessary capabilities to complete the implementation, manufacturing and development process. If we are unable to adequately validate or scale-up the manufacturing process at our current manufacturers’ facilities, we will need to transfer to another manufacturer and complete the manufacturing validation process, which can be lengthy. If we are able to adequately validate and scale-up the manufacturing process for our product candidates with a contract manufacturer, we will still need to negotiate with such contract manufacturer an agreement for commercial supply and it is not certain we will be able to come to agreement on terms acceptable to us. We cannot assure that any stability or other issues relating to the manufacture of any of our product candidates will not occur in the future. If our third-party manufacturers were to encounter any of these difficulties, our ability to provide any product candidates to patients in planned clinical trials and products to patients, once approved, would be jeopardized. Any delay or interruption in the supply of clinical trial supplies could delay the completion of planned clinical trials, increase the costs associated with maintaining clinical trial programs and, depending upon the period of delay, require us to commence new clinical trials at additional expense or terminate clinical trials completely. Any adverse developments affecting clinical or commercial manufacturing of our product candidates or products may result in shipment delays, inventory shortages, lot failures, product withdrawals or recalls, or other interruptions in the supply of our product candidates or products. We may also have to take inventory write-offs and incur other charges and expenses for product candidates or products that fail to meet specifications, undertake costly remediation efforts or seek more costly manufacturing alternatives. Accordingly, failures or difficulties faced at any level of our supply chain could adversely affect our business and delay or impede the development and commercialization of any of our product candidates or products, if approved, and could have an adverse effect on our business, prospects, financial condition and results of operations. Regional or single-source dependencies may in some cases accentuate these risks. For example, the pharmaceutical industry generally, and in some instances our Company, our collaborators or other third parties on which we rely, depend on China-based suppliers or service providers for certain raw materials, products and services, or other activities. Our ability or the ability of our collaborators or such other third parties to continue to engage these China-based suppliers or service providers for certain preclinical research programs and clinical development programs could be restricted due to geopolitical development between the United States and China, including as a result of the escalation of tariffs or other trade restrictions, the BIOSECURE Act or the enactment of new laws that limit our ability to freely contract for goods or services. As part of our process development efforts, we also may make changes to the manufacturing processes at various points during development, for various reasons, such as controlling costs, achieving scale, decreasing processing time, increasing manufacturing success rate or other reasons. Such changes carry the risk that they will not achieve their intended objectives, and any of these changes could cause our product candidates to perform differently and affect the results of our clinical trials. In some circumstances, changes in the manufacturing process may require us to perform ex vivo comparability studies and to collect additional data from patients prior to undertaking more advanced clinical trials. For instance, changes in our process during the course of clinical development may require us to show the comparability of the product used in earlier clinical phases or at earlier portions of a trial to the product used in later clinical phases or later portions of the trial. We intend to rely on third parties to conduct, supervise and monitor our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and if those third parties perform in an unsatisfactory manner, it may harm our business. We do not currently have the ability to independently conduct preclinical studies or clinical trials required to develop our product candidates. We intend to rely on CROs, clinical trial sites and other third parties to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we expect to have limited influence over their actual performance. We intend to rely upon CROs and others for the execution of future nonclinical studies and to monitor, manage and report data for our clinical trials. We expect to control only certain aspects of our CROs’ and others’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies or clinical trials are conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs and others does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We, our CROs and other third parties we might engage will be required to comply with good laboratory practices (“GLPs”) and GCPs, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, EMA, and other comparable foreign regulatory authorities in the form of International Conference on Harmonization guidelines for any of our product candidates that are in preclinical and clinical development. The regulatory authorities enforce GCPs through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators and clinical trial sites. Although we will rely on CROs and others to conduct GCP-compliant clinical trials, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our GLP preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with its investigational plan and protocol and applicable laws and regulations, and our reliance on the CROs and others does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. If we, our CROs and other third parties we engage fail to comply with GCPs, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, EMA, or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. Accordingly, if our CROs or others fail to comply with these regulations or fail to recruit a sufficient number of participants, we may be required to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. While we will have agreements governing their activities, our CROs and other third parties we engage will not be our employees, and we will not control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our future nonclinical and clinical programs. These CROs and others may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials, or other drug development activities which could harm our business. We face the risk of potential unauthorized disclosure or misappropriation of our intellectual property by CROs and others, which may reduce our trade secret protection and allow 74 our potential competitors to access and exploit our proprietary technology. In addition, certain of our agreements with CROs and other third parties currently or will provide for monetary and other limitations on their liability. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines, or if the quality or accuracy of the preclinical or clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our protocols or regulatory requirements or for any other reasons, our preclinical or clinical programs may be extended, delayed or terminated, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize any product candidate that we develop. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for any product candidate that we develop would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed, decreased or eliminated. If our relationship with these CROs terminates, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional CROs involves substantial cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can negatively impact our ability to meet our desired development timelines. Though we intend to carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a negative impact on our business, financial condition and prospects. In addition, principal investigators for our clinical trials may serve as scientific advisors or consultants to us from time to time and receive compensation in connection with such services. Under certain circumstances, we may be required to report some of these relationships to the FDA. The FDA may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the trial. The FDA may therefore question the integrity of the data generated at the applicable clinical trial site and the utility of the clinical trial itself may be jeopardized. This could result in a delay in approval, or rejection, of our marketing applications by the FDA and may ultimately lead to the denial of marketing approval of our product candidates. We currently depend and in the future may continue to depend on single- or limited-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in the product candidates we may develop. We currently depend and in the future may continue to depend on single- or limited-source suppliers for some of the components and materials used in any product candidates we may develop. We cannot ensure that these suppliers or service providers will remain in business, have sufficient capacity or supply to meet our needs or that they will not be purchased by one of our competitors or another company that is not interested in continuing to work with us. Our use of single-source suppliers of raw materials, components, key processes and finished goods could expose us to several risks, including disruptions in supply, price increases or late deliveries. There are, in general, relatively few alternative sources of supply for substitute components. These vendors may be unable or unwilling to meet our future demands for our clinical trials or commercial sale. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers for these components, materials and processes could take a substantial amount of time and it may be difficult to establish replacement suppliers who meet regulatory requirements. Any disruption in supply from any single-source supplier or service provider could lead to supply delays or interruptions which would damage our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If we have to switch to a replacement supplier, the manufacture and delivery of any product candidates we may develop could be interrupted for an extended period, which could adversely affect our business. Establishing additional or replacement suppliers, if required, may not be accomplished quickly or at all. If we are able to find a replacement supplier, the replacement supplier would need to be qualified and may require additional regulatory authority approval, which could result in further delay. While we seek to maintain adequate inventory of the single source components and materials used in our therapeutics, any interruption or delay in the supply of components or materials, or our inability to obtain components or materials from alternate sources at acceptable prices in a timely manner, could impair our ability to meet the demand for our product candidates. Risks Related to Intellectual Property If we are unable to obtain, maintain, defend and enforce patent or other intellectual property protection for our current or any future product candidates, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our markets. We have filed patent applications in both the United States and in other jurisdictions, and we anticipate that we will do so in the future, as appropriate. However, we cannot predict: •if and when any patents will issue; •the degree and scope of protection any issued patents will afford us against competitors, including whether third parties will find ways to invalidate or otherwise circumvent our patents; •whether others will apply for or obtain patents claiming aspects similar to those covered by our patents and patent applications; •whether we will need to initiate litigation or administrative proceedings to defend our patent rights, which may be costly whether we win or lose; or 75 •whether the patent applications that we own, or may in-license, will result in issued patents with claims that cover our product candidates or uses thereof in the United States or in foreign jurisdictions. We rely, and may in the future rely, upon a combination of patent, trade secret and trademark protection for our current and any future product candidates and proprietary technologies to prevent third parties from exploiting our achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. These legal measures afford only limited protection, and competitors or others may gain access to or use our intellectual property and proprietary information. Our success depends in large part on our ability to obtain, maintain, expand, enforce, and defend the scope, ownership or control, validity and enforceability of our intellectual property protection in the United States and other countries with respect to our current and any future product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop. Our commercial success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the United States and other jurisdictions with respect to our current and any future product candidates. We seek to protect our proprietary position by filing patent applications in the United States and abroad related to our current and future development programs and product candidates. The patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming, and we may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner, including as a result of factors impacting our, our licensors’ or governmental patent offices’ operations. It is possible that we will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. The patent applications that we own or in-license may fail to result in issued patents with claims that cover our current or any future product candidates in the United States or in foreign jurisdictions. There is no assurance that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been or will be found, which unknown prior art can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. Even if patents do issue and even if such patents cover our current or any future product candidates, third parties may challenge their scope, validity, or enforceability, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable. Any successful opposition to these patents or any other patents owned by or licensed to us could deprive us of rights necessary for the successful commercialization of any product candidates that we may develop. Further, if we encounter delays in regulatory approvals, the period of time during which we could market a product candidate under patent protection could be reduced. If the patent applications we hold or have in-licensed with respect to our product candidates fail to issue, if their breadth or strength of protection is threatened, or if they fail to provide meaningful exclusivity for current or any future product candidates, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to develop product candidates, and threaten our ability to commercialize, future drug products. Any such outcome could have a negative effect on our business. Composition of matter patents for pharmaceutical products provide intellectual property protection for those types of products, as such patents provide protection without regard to any method of use. We cannot be certain, however, that the claims in our pending patent applications covering the composition of matter of any of our product candidates will be considered patentable by the USPTO, or by patent offices in foreign jurisdictions, or that the claims in any of our patents that may issue will be considered valid and enforceable by courts in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Method of use patents protect the use of a product for the specified method. We cannot be certain, however, that the claims in our pending patent applications covering methods of use of our product candidates will be considered patentable by the USPTO, or by patent offices in foreign jurisdictions, or that the claims in any of our patents that may issue will be considered valid and enforceable by courts in the United States or foreign jurisdictions. Further, this type of patent does not prevent a competitor from making and marketing a product that is identical to our product for an indication that is outside the scope of the patented method. Moreover, even if competitors do not actively promote their product for our targeted indications, once approved for therapeutic use by FDA or counterpart foreign regulatory authorities, physicians may prescribe these products “off-label” for those uses that are covered by our method of use patents. Although off-label prescriptions may infringe or contribute to the infringement of method of use patents, the practice is common and such infringement is difficult to prevent or enforce against. The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. In addition, the laws of foreign jurisdictions may not protect our rights to the same extent as the laws of the United States. Patent applications in the United States and certain other jurisdictions are typically not published until 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot know with certainty whether we were the first to file for patent protection. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Our pending and future patent applications may not result in patents being issued which protect our technology or products, in whole or in part, or which effectively prevent others from commercializing competitive technologies or products. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other jurisdictions may diminish the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. These changes could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a negative effect on our business. Moreover, we may be subject to a third-party pre-issuance submission of prior art to the USPTO or another patent office or become involved in opposition, derivation, reexamination, inter partes review (“IPR”), post-grant review (“PGR”) or interference proceedings challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination in any such submission, proceeding or litigation 76 could reduce the scope of, or invalidate, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or drugs and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize drugs without infringing third-party patent rights or obtaining a costly license from a third party. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize our product candidates. The issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and our owned and licensed patents may be challenged in the courts or patent offices in the United States and abroad. An adverse determination in any such challenges may result in loss of exclusivity or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology, products or methods, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology, products or methods. Moreover, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are paid timely, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from the earliest filing date of a non-provisional patent application. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. For instance, a patent term extension based on regulatory delay may be available in the United States. However, only a single patent can be extended for each marketing approval, and any patent can be extended only once, for a single product. Moreover, the scope of protection during the period of the patent term extension does not necessarily extend to all claims, but instead only to claims that read on the product as approved. Laws governing analogous patent term extensions in foreign jurisdictions vary widely, as do laws governing the ability to obtain multiple patents from a single patent family. Additionally, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or restoration, or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we will have the right to exclusively market our product will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration and may take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data to launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case, and our revenue could be reduced, possibly materially. In addition, although upon issuance in the United States a patent’s term can be increased based on certain delays caused by the USPTO, this increase can be reduced or eliminated based on certain delays caused by the patent applicant during patent prosecution. Without patent protection for our product candidates, including once the patent life has expired even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, we may be open to competition from generic versions of such drugs. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent term has expired for a product, we may be open to competition from generic medications. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing drugs similar or identical to ours. Even if we have or obtain patents covering our products or methods, we may still be barred from making, using and selling such products or methods because of the patent rights of others. Others may have filed, and in the future may file, patent applications covering compositions, products or methods that are similar or identical to ours, which could materially affect our ability to successfully develop our technology or to successfully commercialize any approved products alone or with collaborators. Patent applications in the United States and elsewhere are generally published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patent applications covering our methods and product candidates could have been filed by others without our knowledge. Additionally, pending claims in patent applications which have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our platform technologies or related products. These patent applications may have priority over patent applications filed by us. We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship or ownership of our patents and other intellectual property. We may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property as an inventor, co-inventor, owner or co-owner. For example, we or our licensors may have inventorship or ownership disputes arise from conflicting obligations of employees, consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or our or our licensors’ ownership of our owned or in-licensed patents, trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we or our licensors fail in defending any such claims, we may be required to pay monetary damages and we may also lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our product candidates. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 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 product candidates. Our commercial success depends, in part, on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates without infringing the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. Third parties may allege that we have infringed or misappropriated their intellectual property. Litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims, with or without 77 merit, is unpredictable and generally expensive and time consuming and, even if resolved in our favor, is likely to divert significant resources from our core business, including distracting our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the market price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to adequately conduct such litigation or proceedings. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could have a material adverse effect on our ability to compete in the marketplace. 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 product candidates. We cannot be certain that our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop will not infringe existing or future patents owned by third parties. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing or future intellectual property rights. In the United States, proving invalidity in court requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents. If we are found to infringe a third party’s intellectual property rights, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing product candidate or product. 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 product candidate. 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 investigational products or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. We may not be aware of patents that have already been issued and that a third party, for example, a competitor in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates, might assert are infringed by our product candidates, including claims to compositions, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods of use or treatment that cover our product candidates. It is also possible that patents owned by third parties of which we are aware, but which we do not believe are relevant to our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop, could be found to be infringed by one or more of our product candidates. In addition, because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications that may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. Our competitors in both the United States and abroad, many of which have substantially greater resources and have made substantial investments in patent portfolios and competing technologies, may have applied for or obtained or may in the future apply for and obtain, patents that will prevent, limit or otherwise interfere with our ability to make, use and sell our product candidates. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries have produced a considerable 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 product candidates, products 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 may be difficult. For example, in the United States, proving invalidity in court requires a showing of clear and convincing evidence to overcome the presumption of validity enjoyed by issued patents, and there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. Even if we are successful in these proceedings, we may incur substantial costs and the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel could be diverted in pursuing these proceedings, which could have a material adverse effect on our business and operations. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during litigation. In addition, we may not have sufficient resources to bring these actions to a successful conclusion. We may choose to challenge the enforceability or validity of claims in a third party’s U.S. patent by requesting that the USPTO review the patent claims in an ex parte re-examination, IPR or PGR proceeding. These proceedings are expensive and may consume our time or other resources. We may choose to challenge a third party’s patent in patent opposition proceedings in the European Patent Office (“EPO”), or other foreign patent office. The costs of these opposition proceedings could be substantial and may consume our time or other resources. If we fail to obtain a favorable result at the USPTO, EPO or other patent office, then we may be exposed to litigation by a third party alleging that the patent may be infringed by our product candidates or proprietary technologies. If we are found to infringe a third-party’s intellectual property rights, we could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing or commercializing the infringing product candidate or product. 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 product candidate. 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 product candidates or force 78 us to cease some of our business operations, and could divert the time and attention of our technical personnel and management, cause development delays, and/or require us to develop non-infringing technology, which may not be possible on a cost-effective basis, any of which could materially harm our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties and other fees, redesign our infringing drug or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Our technology licensed from various third parties may be subject to retained rights. Our future licensors may retain certain rights under the relevant agreements with us, including the right to use the underlying technology for noncommercial academic and research use, to publish general scientific findings from research related to the technology, and to make customary scientific and scholarly disclosures of information relating to the technology. It is difficult to monitor whether our licensors limit their use of the technology to these uses, and we could incur substantial expenses to enforce our rights to our licensed technology in the event of misuse. In addition, the United States federal government retains certain rights in inventions produced with its financial assistance under the Patent and Trademark Law Amendments Act (“Bayh-Dole Act”). The federal government retains a “nonexclusive, nontransferable, irrevocable, paid-up license” for its own benefit. The Bayh-Dole Act also provides federal agencies with “march-in rights.” March-in rights allow the government, in specified circumstances, to require the contractor or successors in title to the patent to grant a “nonexclusive, partially exclusive, or exclusive license” to a “responsible applicant or applicants.” If the patent owner refuses to do so, the government may grant the license itself. We sometimes collaborate with academic institutions to accelerate our preclinical research or development, creating a risk that federal funds may be commingled. Therefore, we cannot be sure that any intellectual property co-developed from a collaboration with an academic institution will be free from government rights pursuant to the Bayh-Dole Act. If, in the future, we co-own or license in technology which is critical to our business that is developed in whole or in part with federal funds subject to the Bayh-Dole Act, our ability to enforce or otherwise exploit patents covering such technology may be adversely affected. We may not identify relevant third-party patents or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration date of a third-party patent, which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our products. We may not be aware of patents or pending or future patent applications that, if issued, would block us from commercializing our product candidates. Thus, we cannot guarantee that our product candidates, or our commercialization thereof, do not and will not infringe any third party’s intellectual property. We cannot guarantee that any patent searches or analyses that are performed, including the identification of relevant patents, the scope of patent claims or the expiration dates of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our future products. We may incorrectly determine that our products are not covered by a third-party patent or may incorrectly predict whether a third-party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the United States or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our product candidates. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our future products. One aspect of the determination of patentability of our inventions depends on the scope and content of the “prior art,” information that was or is deemed available to a person of skill in the relevant art prior to the priority date of the claimed invention. There may be prior art of which we are not aware that may affect the patentability of our patent claims or, if issued, affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim. The landscape of intellectual property related to our product candidates and future products is constantly changing. Therefore, we may not be aware of all third-party intellectual property rights potentially relating to our product candidates or their intended uses, and as a result the impact of such third-party intellectual property rights upon the patentability of our own patents and patent applications, as well as the impact of such third-party intellectual property upon our freedom to operate, is highly uncertain. Because patent applications in the United States and certain other jurisdictions are confidential for typically a period of at least 18 months after their priority date, or may not be published at all, we cannot be certain that we were the first to file any patent application related to our product candidates. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our patent rights are highly uncertain. Furthermore, for U.S. applications in which all claims are entitled to a priority date before March 16, 2013, an interference proceeding can be provoked by a third party or instituted by the USPTO to determine who was the first to invent any of the subject matter covered by the patent claims of our applications. For U.S. applications containing a claim not entitled to priority before March 16, 2013, there is a greater level of uncertainty in the patent law in view of the passage of the America Invents Act, which brought into effect significant changes to the U.S. patent laws, including new procedures for challenging pending patent applications and issued 79 patents. Should we fail to win an interference challenge, a third party may obtain rights to intellectual property related to our product candidates and future products. We may not be successful in obtaining or maintaining necessary rights to our product candidates through acquisitions and in-licenses. Because our programs may in the future require the use of proprietary rights held by third parties, the growth of our business may depend in part on our ability to acquire, in-license, or use these third-party proprietary rights. We may be unable to acquire or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights from third parties that we identify as necessary for our product candidates. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and a number of more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources and greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. We also may be unable to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights on terms that would allow us to make an appropriate return on our investment or at all. If we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to abandon development of the relevant program or product candidate, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. While we normally seek to obtain the right to control prosecution, maintenance and enforcement of the patents relating to our product candidates, there may be times when the filing and prosecution activities for patents and patent applications relating to our product candidates are controlled by our future licensors or collaboration partners. If any of our future licensors or collaboration partners fail to prosecute, maintain and enforce such patents and patent applications in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business, including by payment of all applicable fees for patents covering our product candidates, we could lose our rights to the intellectual property or our exclusivity with respect to those rights, our ability to develop and commercialize those product candidates may be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products. In addition, even where we have the right to control patent prosecution of patents and patent applications we have licensed to and from third parties, we may still be adversely affected or prejudiced by actions or inactions of our licensees, our future licensors and their counsel that took place prior to the date upon which we assumed control over patent prosecution. We may enter into license agreements in the future with others to advance our existing or future research or allow commercialization of our product candidates. These licenses may not provide exclusive rights to use such intellectual property and technology in all relevant fields of use and in all territories in which we may wish to develop or commercialize our technology platform or product candidates in the future. In addition, subject to the terms of any such license agreements, we may not have the right to control the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement, and defense of patents and patent applications covering the technology that we license from third parties. In such an event, we cannot be certain that these patents and patent applications will be prepared, filed, prosecuted, maintained, enforced, and defended in a manner consistent with the best interests of our business. If our future licensors fail to prosecute, maintain, enforce, and defend such patents or patent applications, or lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated, and our right to develop and commercialize any of our product candidates that are subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected. Our future licensors may rely on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our future licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-license. If other third parties have ownership rights to our future in-licensed patents, they may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects. It is possible that we may be unable to obtain necessary licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us (which could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects). In the event we are unable to obtain necessary licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to redesign our technology, product candidates, or the methods for manufacturing them or to develop or license replacement technology, all of which may not be feasible on a technical or commercial basis. If we are unable to do so, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third-party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our current technology, manufacturing methods, product candidates, or future methods or products resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our manufacture or future sales, or, with respect to our future sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation to third parties, which could be significant. Disputes may arise between us and our future licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including: •the scope of rights granted under the license agreement and other interpretation-related issues; 80 •whether and the extent to which our technology and processes infringe on intellectual property of the licensor that is not subject to the licensing agreement; •our right to sublicense patents and other rights to third parties; •our diligence obligations under the license agreement and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations; •our right to transfer or assign the license; •the inventorship and ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our future licensors and us and our partners; and •the priority of invention of patented technology. In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology from third parties are complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology, or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects. Moreover, if disputes over intellectual property that we license in the future prevent or impair our ability to maintain our licensing arrangements on commercially acceptable terms, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects. In spite of our best efforts, our future licensors might conclude that we materially breached our license agreements and might therefore terminate the license agreements, thereby removing our ability to develop and commercialize products and technology covered by these license agreements. If these in-licenses are terminated, or if the underlying patents fail to provide the intended exclusivity, competitors would have the freedom to seek regulatory approval of, and to market, products identical to ours. This could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects. From time to time, we may be required to license technologies relating to our programs from additional third parties to further develop or commercialize our product candidates. Should we be required to obtain licenses to any third-party technology, including any such patents required to manufacture, use or sell our product candidates, such licenses may not be available to us on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. The inability to obtain any third-party license required to develop or commercialize any of our product candidates could cause us to abandon any related efforts, which could seriously harm our business and operations. We may be involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents, which could be expensive, time consuming and unsuccessful. Further, our issued patents could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged in court. Competitors may infringe our intellectual property rights. To prevent infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. In addition, in a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent we own or license is not valid, is unenforceable and/or is not infringed. If we or our current or future collaborators were to initiate legal proceedings against a third party to enforce a patent covering one of our product candidates, the defendant could counterclaim that the patent is invalid and/or unenforceable in whole or in part. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge include an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including but not limited to lack of novelty, obviousness, or insufficient written description or enablement. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could include an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar invalidity claims before the USPTO or patent offices abroad, even outside the context of litigation. Such mechanisms include re-examination, PGR, IPR, derivation proceedings, interference proceedings, and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in loss of rights to, the revocation of, cancellation of or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our technology or platform, or any product candidates that we may develop. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. There is also no assurance that there is not prior art of which we are aware, but which we do not believe affects the validity or enforceability of a claim in our patents and patent applications, which may, nonetheless, ultimately be found to affect the validity or enforceability of a patent claim. If a third party were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on our product candidates or other intellectual property that we may develop. In addition, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened or questioned, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize our product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection would have a material adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to our intellectual property rights may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation or other legal proceedings relating to 81 our intellectual property rights, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or other proceedings. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our common stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace. We may be subject to claims that we or our employees have misappropriated the intellectual property, including confidential information, know-how or trade secrets, of a third-party, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property. Many of our employees, consultants and contractors were previously employed at or engaged by other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies, including our competitors or potential competitors. Some of these employees, consultants and contractors executed proprietary rights, non-disclosure and non-competition agreements in connection with such previous employment. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and contractors do not use the intellectual property, proprietary information, know-how or trade secrets of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we have wrongfully hired an employee from a competitor or that we or these employees, consultants or contractors have used or disclosed such third-party intellectual property, including know-how, trade secrets or other proprietary information, to us. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. If we fail in defending any such claims, it may a have negative impact on our business and our ability to develop product candidates or commercialize our technology. In addition to paying substantial monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel, or access to consultants and contractors. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could incur substantial costs and be a distraction to management and scientific personnel. In addition, while we typically require our employees, consultants and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact develops intellectual property that we regard as our own, which may result in claims by or against us related to the ownership of such intellectual property. If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights. Even if we are successful in prosecuting or defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our senior management and scientific personnel. We may license intellectual property rights from third parties. Such licenses may be subject to early termination if we fail to comply with our obligations in our licenses with third parties, which could result in the loss of rights or technology that are material to our business. We may become a party to licenses that give us rights to third-party intellectual property or technology that is necessary or useful for our business, and we may enter into additional licenses in the future. Under these license agreements, we are or may become obligated to pay the licensor fees, which may include annual license fees, milestone payments, royalties, a percentage of revenues associated with the licensed technology and a percentage of sublicensing revenue. These fees may be significant, which could make it difficult for us to achieve or maintain profitability. In addition, under certain of such agreements, we are or may become required to diligently pursue the development of products using the licensed technology. If we fail to comply with these obligations, including due to our use of the intellectual property licensed to us in an unauthorized manner, and fail to cure our breach within a specified period of time, the licensor may have the right to terminate the applicable license, in which event we could lose valuable rights and technology that are material to our business, harming our ability to develop, manufacture and/or commercialize our platform, products or product candidates. In addition, the agreements under which we license intellectual property or technology to or from third-parties can be complex, and certain provisions in such agreements may be susceptible to multiple interpretations. The resolution of any contract interpretation disagreement that may arise could narrow what we believe to be the scope of our rights to the relevant intellectual property or technology or increase what we believe to be our financial or other obligations under the relevant agreement, either of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. The licensing and acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive practice, and companies that may be more established, or have greater resources than we do, may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider necessary or attractive in order to commercialize our product candidates. More established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their larger size and cash resources or greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. There can be no assurance that we will be able to successfully complete such negotiations and ultimately acquire the rights to the intellectual property surrounding the additional product candidates that we may seek to acquire. The failure to obtain or in-license any compositions, methods of use, processes or other third-party intellectual property rights at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, could harm our business. If we fail to obtain licenses to necessary third-party intellectual property rights, we may need to cease use of the compositions or methods covered by such third-party intellectual property rights. Furthermore, we may need to seek to develop alternative approaches that do not infringe on such intellectual property rights which may entail additional costs and development delays, even if we were able to develop such alternatives, which may not be feasible. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be 82 non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. In that event, we may be required to expend significant time and resources to develop or license replacement technology. Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by government patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements. Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the USPTO and various government patent agencies outside of the United States over the lifetime of our owned and licensed patents and/or applications and any patent rights we may own or license in the future. We rely on our outside counsel, patent annuity service providers, or our licensing partners to pay these fees to the applicable government patent agencies. If these fees are not paid when due, our rights to such patents or patent applications may be irrevocably abandoned or otherwise materially impaired. The USPTO and various non-U.S. government patent agencies require compliance with numerous procedural, documentary, and other similar provisions during the patent application process. For example, many jurisdictions, including the U.S. and China, require a foreign filing license before seeking patent protection in a jurisdiction outside of the jurisdiction of which the inventor is a citizen or in which the invention was made. Each jurisdiction’s laws regarding foreign filing licenses vary and may even conflict. We employ reputable law firms in foreign jurisdictions and other professionals to help us comply and we are also dependent on any licensors to take the necessary action to comply with these requirements with respect to our intellectual property. 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. There are situations, however, in which non-compliance can result in abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. Additional non-compliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include, but are not limited to, failure to respond to official actions within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. In such an event, potential competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance could harm our business. We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world, which could negatively impact our business. Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, enforcing, and defending patent applications and patents covering our current and any future product candidates worldwide is prohibitively expensive, so we will pursue patents in a limited number of jurisdictions. Moreover, our intellectual property rights in some jurisdictions outside the United States can have a different scope and strength than do those in the United States. Consequently, we will not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all jurisdictions, or from selling or importing in and into various jurisdictions products made using our inventions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own product candidates and, further, may export otherwise infringing product candidates to territories where we may obtain patent protection, but where patent enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. Further, these product candidates may compete with our product candidates in jurisdictions where we do not have any issued or licensed patents and any future patent claims or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from so competing. Many companies have encountered significant problems protecting and defending intellectual property rights in jurisdictions outside the United States. The legal systems of certain jurisdictions do not favor the enforcement of patents, trade secrets and other intellectual property rights, particularly those relating to pharmaceutical products, which could make it difficult in those jurisdictions for us to stop the infringement or misappropriation of our patents or other intellectual property rights, including the marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights. Proceedings to enforce our patents and other intellectual property rights in jurisdictions outside the United States could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business. Furthermore, such proceedings could put our patents at risk of being invalidated, held unenforceable, or interpreted narrowly, could put our patent applications at risk of not issuing, and could provoke third parties to assert claims of infringement or misappropriation against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Similarly, if our trade secrets are disclosed in a foreign jurisdiction, competitors worldwide could have access to our proprietary information and we may be without satisfactory recourse. Such disclosure could have a material adverse effect on our business. Our ability to protect and enforce our intellectual property rights may be adversely affected by unforeseen changes in intellectual property laws in the United States and around the world. For example, in Europe, a new unitary patent system took effect June 1, 2023, which will significantly impact European patents, including those granted before the introduction of such a system. Under the unitary patent system, European applications have the option, upon grant of a patent, of becoming a Unitary Patent which will be subject to the jurisdiction of the Unitary Patent Court (“UPC”). As the UPC is a new court system, there is no precedent for the court, increasing the uncertainty of any litigation. Patents granted before the implementation of the UPC will have the option of opting out of the jurisdiction of the UPC and remaining as national patents in the UPC countries. Patents that remain under the jurisdiction of the UPC will be potentially vulnerable to a single UPC-based revocation challenge that, if successful, could invalidate the patent in all countries who are signatories to the UPC. We cannot predict with certainty the long-term effects of any potential changes. Certain jurisdictions, including China and India, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties under 83 certain circumstances. In those jurisdictions, we and our licensors may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we or our licensors are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. In addition, many jurisdictions limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license. If we do not obtain patent term extension and data exclusivity for any product candidates we may develop, our business may be materially harmed. Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA marketing approval of any product candidates we may develop and our technology, one or more U.S. patents that we license or may own in the future may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. Under certain circumstances the Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent extension term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. A patent term extension cannot extend the term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent may be extended and only those claims covering the approved product, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. The application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent for which extension is sought and within 60 days of FDA approval. A patent that covers multiple products for which approval is sought can only be extended in connection with one of the approvals. However, we may not be granted an extension because of, for example, failing to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, failing to apply within applicable deadlines, failing to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise failing to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the applicable patent term extension or the scope of patent protection afforded could be less than we request. In addition, to the extent we wish to pursue patent term extension based on a patent that we in-license from a third party, we would need the cooperation of that third party. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, we may be exposed earlier than projected to competition from competitive products, including generics or biosimilars following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced earlier than projected. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Confidentiality agreements with employees and third parties may not prevent unauthorized disclosure of our trade secrets and other proprietary information. If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed. In addition to the protection afforded by patents, we seek to rely on trade secret protection and confidentiality agreements to protect proprietary information and confidential know-how that we elect not to patent, including processes for which patents are difficult to enforce, and any other elements of our product candidates, technology and product discovery, development processes and drug discovery platform that involve proprietary know-how, information, or technology that is not covered by patents. In particular, our trade secrets, confidential know-how and other proprietary information includes our proprietary Native Complex Platform® drug discovery platform, which we do not plan to patent. Any disclosure, either intentional or unintentional, by our employees, the employees of third parties with whom we share our facilities or third-party consultants and vendors that we engage to perform research, clinical trials or manufacturing activities, or misappropriation by third parties (such as through a cybersecurity breach) of our trade secrets or proprietary information could enable competitors to duplicate or surpass our technological achievements, thus eroding our competitive position in our market. Such risk of disclosure can be increased by our use of AI technologies and can result in misappropriation and other security incidents. Because we expect to rely on third parties in the development and manufacture of our product candidates, we must, at times, share trade secrets with them. Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed. Trade secrets, confidential know-how and proprietary information, however, may be difficult to protect. We seek to protect our trade secrets, confidential know-how and proprietary information, including our proprietary processes and drug discovery platform, in part, by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, outside scientific advisors, contractors, and collaborators. With our consultants, contractors, and outside scientific collaborators, these agreements typically include invention assignment obligations. Although we use reasonable efforts to protect our trade secrets, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and notwithstanding the existence of a confidentiality agreement our employees, consultants, outside scientific advisors, contractors, and collaborators might intentionally or inadvertently disclose our trade secret information, including to competitors. In addition, competitors or other third parties may otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or independently develop substantially equivalent information and techniques. Despite our efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. Furthermore, the laws of some foreign jurisdictions do not protect proprietary rights to the same extent or in the same manner as the laws of the United States. As a result, we may encounter significant problems in protecting and defending our intellectual property both in the United States and abroad. If we are unable to prevent unauthorized material disclosure of our intellectual property to third parties, or misappropriation of our intellectual property by third parties, we may not be able to establish or maintain a competitive advantage in our market, which could materially adversely affect our business, operating results, and financial condition. Further, although we maintain cyber liability 84 insurance, this insurance may not provide adequate coverage against potential liabilities related to any experienced cybersecurity incident or data breach. Our intellectual property rights do not necessarily protect against all potential threats to our business. The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations, and may not adequately protect our business. These risks and uncertainties include the following: •others may be able to make compounds or formulations that are similar to our product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of any patents, should they issue, that we own or control; •we or any strategic partners might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patents or pending patent applications that we own or control; •we might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our product candidates or inventions we own or control; •others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights; •pending patent applications that we own or control may not lead to issued patents; •issued patents that we own or control may be held invalid or unenforceable as a result of legal challenges; •our competitors might conduct research and development activities in the United States and other jurisdictions that provide a safe harbor from patent infringement claims for certain research and development activities, as well as in jurisdictions where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive drugs for sale in our major commercial markets; •we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable; and •the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business. If our trademarks and trade names are not adequately protected, we may not be able to build name recognition in our markets of interest and our business may be adversely affected. Our current or future trademarks or trade names may be challenged, opposed, infringed, circumvented, invalidated, cancelled, declared generic, determined to be not entitled to registration, or determined to be infringing on other marks. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections of our applications by the USPTO or in foreign jurisdictions. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those rejections, we may be unable to overcome such rejections. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many other jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek to cancel registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may be filed against our trademarks, and our trademarks may not survive such proceedings. Trademark litigation could be expensive. In addition, we could be found liable for significant monetary damages, including treble damages, disgorgement of profits and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a trademark. We may not be able to protect our exclusive right to trademarks or trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential collaborators or customers in our markets of interest. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks or trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. We may license our trademarks or trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Though these agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks or trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks or tradenames by third parties may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks or trade names. Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our product candidates in the United States must be approved by the FDA, regardless of whether we have registered it, or applied to register it, as a trademark. The FDA typically conducts a review of proposed product names, including an evaluation of potential for confusion with other product names. If the FDA (or an equivalent administrative body in a foreign jurisdiction) objects to any of our proposed proprietary product names, we may be required to expend significant additional resources in an effort to identify a suitable substitute name that would qualify under applicable trademark laws, not infringe the existing rights of third parties and be acceptable to the FDA or equivalent body. Furthermore, in many jurisdictions, owning and maintaining a trademark registration may not provide an adequate defense against a subsequent infringement claim asserted by the owner of a senior trademark. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names, which we need to build name recognition among potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. At times, competitors or other third parties may adopt trade names or trademarks similar to ours, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement claims brought by owners of other registered trademarks or trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. Furthermore, assertions of potential trademark infringement or possible market confusion may lead to coexistence agreements in order to avoid costly disputes related to our trademarks. As a consequence, we may be forced to amend the list of goods and services covered by our trademarks more narrowly than 85 as originally filed and intended, which could adversely affect our ability to establish name recognition. Over the long term, if we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, then we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. Our efforts to enforce or protect our proprietary rights related to trademarks, trade names, domain name or other intellectual property may be ineffective and could result in substantial costs and diversion of resources and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Rights to improvements to our product candidates may be held by third parties. In the course of testing our product candidates, we may enter into agreements with third parties to conduct clinical testing, which may provide that improvements to our product candidates may be owned solely by a third party or jointly between the parties. If we determine that rights to such improvements owned solely by a third party are necessary to commercialize our product candidates or maintain our competitive advantage, we may need to obtain a license from such third party in order to use the improvements and continue developing, manufacturing or marketing the product candidates. 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 such a license, it could be granted on non-exclusive terms, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us. Failure to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or to obtain an exclusive license, could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease some of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. If we determine that rights to improvements jointly owned between us and a third party are necessary to commercialize our product candidates or maintain our competitive advantage, we may need to obtain an exclusive license from such third party. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such third-party co-owners’ interest in such improvements, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other parties, including our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners of our intellectual property in order to enforce such intellectual property against other parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations, and prospects. Risks Related to Ownership of Our Common Stock We do not know whether a market will be sustained for our common stock or what the market price of our common stock will be, and, as a result, it may be difficult for you to sell your shares of our common stock. Although our common stock is listed on the Nasdaq Global Market (“Nasdaq”), an active trading market for our common stock may not be sustained. If a market for our common stock is not sustained or if trading volume in our common stock is low, it may be difficult for you to sell your shares of common stock at an attractive price or at all. We cannot predict the prices at which our common stock will trade. It is possible that in one or more future periods our results of operations may be below the expectations of public market analysts and investors, and, as a result of these and other factors, the price of our common stock may fall. The market price of our common stock may be volatile, which could result in substantial losses for investors purchasing shares. The market price for our common stock may be influenced by those factors discussed in this “Risk Factors” section and many others, some of which may include: •the success of existing or new competitive product candidates or technologies; •the commencement, enrollment, completion and results of preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates; •adverse results or delays, suspensions or terminations in future preclinical studies or clinical trials; •unanticipated serious safety concerns related to our product candidates; •our decision to initiate a clinical trial, not to initiate a clinical trial or to terminate an existing clinical trial; •adverse regulatory decisions, including failure to receive regulatory approval of our product candidates or the failure of a regulatory authority to accept data from preclinical studies or clinical trials conducted in other countries; •failure to commercialize our product candidates, if approved; •failure or discontinuation of any of our development and research programs; •results of any preclinical studies, clinical trials or regulatory approvals of product candidates of our competitors, or announcements about new research programs or product candidates of our competitors; •commencement or termination of collaborations for our product development and research programs; •regulatory or legal developments in the United States and other countries; •developments or disputes concerning patent applications, issued patents or other intellectual property or proprietary rights; •the recruitment or departure of key personnel; 86 •the level of expenses related to any of our research programs, clinical development programs or product candidates that we may develop; •actual or anticipated changes in estimates as to financial results, development timelines or recommendations by securities analysts, if any, that cover our stock; •announcement or expectation of additional financing efforts; •sales of our common stock by us, our insiders or other stockholders; •expiration of market stand-off or lock-up agreements; •our ability to effectively manage our growth; •actual or anticipated variations in quarterly operating results; •our cash position; •our failure to meet the estimates and projections of the investment community or that we may otherwise provide to the public; •trading volume of our common stock; •variations in our financial results or those of companies that are perceived to be similar to us; •changes in accounting practices; •ineffectiveness of our internal controls; •significant lawsuits, including patent or stockholder litigation; •changes in the structure of healthcare payment systems; •market conditions in the pharmaceutical and biotechnology sectors; and •general economic, political, industry and market conditions. In addition, the stock market in general, and the market for pharmaceutical companies in particular, has experienced extreme price and volume fluctuations that have often been unrelated or disproportionate to the operating performance of these companies. Broad market and industry factors may negatively affect the market price of our common stock, regardless of our actual operating performance. In the past, securities class action litigation has often been instituted against companies following periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities. This type of litigation, if instituted, could result in substantial costs and a diversion of management’s attention and resources. Future sales, or the perception of future sales, of our common stock in the public market by existing stockholders could cause our stock price to fall. If our existing stockholders sell, or indicate an intention to sell, substantial amounts of our common stock in the public market, the trading price of our common stock could decline. The possibility that these sales may occur, also might make it more difficult for us to sell equity securities in the future at a time and at a price that we deem appropriate. As of June 30, 2026, we had 45,667,490 shares of our common stock outstanding. Shares of unvested restricted stock that were issued and outstanding will become available for sale immediately upon the vesting of such shares, as applicable, and the expiration of any applicable market stand-off or lock-up agreements. Shares issued upon the exercise of stock options pursuant to future awards that may be granted under our equity incentive or inducement plans or pursuant to future awards granted under those plans will become available for sale in the public market to the extent permitted by the provisions of applicable vesting schedules, any applicable market stand-off and lock-up agreements and Rule 144 and Rule 701 under the Securities Act. Certain holders of our common stock have rights, subject to some conditions, to require us to file registration statements covering the sale of their shares or to include their shares in registration statements that we may file for ourselves or other stockholders. We have registered the offer and sale of all shares of common stock that we may issue under our equity compensation plans, and those shares are available for sale in the open market, unless such shares are subject to vesting restrictions with us or any applicable lock-up restrictions. Once we register the offer and sale of shares for the holders of registration rights, they can be freely sold in the public market upon issuance, subject to any applicable lock-up agreements. In addition, we expect that significant additional capital may be needed in the future to continue our planned operations, including conducting clinical trials, commercialization efforts, expanded research and development activities and costs associated with operating a public company. To raise capital, in the future, we may issue additional shares of our common stock, including potentially through our at-the-market offering program, or other equity or debt securities convertible into common stock in connection with a financing, 87 acquisition, litigation settlement, employee arrangements or otherwise. Any such issuance could result in substantial dilution to our existing stockholders and could cause our stock price to decline. We are currently an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company,” and the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies and smaller reporting companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors. We are currently an “emerging growth company” as defined in the JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2022 (“Sarbanes-Oxley Act”), reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years following the completion of our initial public offering (“IPO”), although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer,” which occurs when the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700.0 million as of the prior June 30 (and we do not qualify as a smaller reporting company under the revenue test on the last day of the fiscal year), or if we have total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion or more during any fiscal year before that time, in which cases we would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31, or if we issue more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during any three-year period before that time, in which case we would no longer be an emerging growth company immediately. For so long as we remain an emerging growth company, we are permitted and intend to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. These exemptions include: •not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act; •not being required to comply with the requirements of the Public Company Accounting Oversight Board regarding the communication of critical audit matters in the auditor’s report on the financial statements. •reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our periodic reports and proxy statements; and •exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, the JOBS Act provides that an emerging growth company can also take advantage of an extended transition period for complying with new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have elected to avail ourselves of this exemption from new or revised accounting standards, and therefore, while we are an emerging growth company, we will not be subject to the same requirements to adopt new or revised accounting standards as other public companies that are not emerging growth companies. As a result of this election, our financial statements may not be comparable to those of other public companies that comply with new or revised accounting pronouncements as of public company effective dates. We are also currently a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act; however, we do not expect to be a smaller reporting company beginning with our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ended March 31, 2027, as a result of our June 30, 2026 public float. As a result, we will no longer be eligible to rely on certain scaled disclosure accommodations available solely to smaller reporting companies, although we expect to continue to take advantage of certain exemptions available to emerging growth companies for so long as we remain eligible. We cannot predict whether investors will find our common stock less attractive as a result of our continued reliance on certain exemptions available to emerging growth companies. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our share price may be more volatile. We expect to lose our smaller reporting company status, which will increase our reporting and compliance obligations. Based on our public float as of June 30, 2026, absent a rule change from the SEC, we expect to cease qualifying as a smaller reporting company following the end of fiscal year 2026. Accordingly, beginning with our Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the three months ending March 31, 2027, we will no longer be eligible to rely on the reduced disclosure and reporting requirements applicable to smaller reporting companies and will become subject to the disclosure requirements applicable to companies that do not qualify as smaller reporting companies. The expected loss of our smaller reporting company status may require additional management attention and may increase our legal, accounting and other compliance costs. Any failure to comply with these increased disclosure and reporting requirements could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and the trading price of our common stock. We have incurred and will continue to incur significant increased costs as a result of operating as a public company, and our management is required to devote substantial time to new compliance initiatives and corporate governance practices. As a public company, we have incurred and will continue to incur significant legal, accounting and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company, and these expenses may increase even more after we are no longer an “emerging growth company.” We are subject to the reporting requirements of the Exchange Act, which requires, among other things, that we file with the SEC annual, quarterly and current reports with respect to our business and financial condition. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently adopted by the SEC and Nasdaq to implement provisions of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, impose significant requirements on public companies, including requiring establishment and maintenance of effective disclosure and financial reporting controls and 88 changes in corporate governance practices. Further, in July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act (“Dodd-Frank Act”) was enacted. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that require the SEC to adopt additional rules and regulations in these areas such as “say on pay” and proxy access. Recent legislation permits emerging growth companies to implement many of these requirements over a longer period and up to the fifth anniversary of our IPO. Stockholder activism, the current political environment and the current high level of government intervention and regulatory reform may lead to substantial new regulations and disclosure obligations, which may lead to additional compliance costs and impact the manner in which we operate our business in ways we cannot currently anticipate. We expect the rules and regulations applicable to public companies to substantially increase our legal and financial compliance costs and to make some activities more time-consuming and costly. If these requirements divert the attention of our management and personnel from other business concerns, they could have an adverse effect on our business. The increased costs will decrease our net income or increase our net loss, and may require us to reduce costs in other areas of our business or increase the prices of our products or services. For example, we expect these rules and regulations to make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we may be required to incur substantial costs to maintain the same or similar coverage. We cannot predict or estimate the amount or timing of additional costs we may incur to respond to these requirements. The impact of these requirements could also make it more difficult for us to attract and retain qualified persons to serve on our board of directors, our board committees or as executive officers. Insiders have substantial influence over us, which could limit your ability to affect the outcome of key transactions, including a change of control. Based on the beneficial ownership of our common stock as of June 30, 2026, our directors and executive officers, holders of 5% or more of our capital stock and their respective affiliates beneficially own a significant percentage of our outstanding common stock. These stockholders, if they act together, will be able to influence our management and affairs and all matters requiring stockholder approval. For example, these stockholders may be able to control elections of directors, amendments of our organizational documents or approval of any merger, sale of assets or other major corporate transaction. This concentration of ownership may have the effect of delaying or preventing a change in control of our company and might affect the market price of our common stock. We do not expect to pay any dividends for the foreseeable future. Investors may never obtain a return on their investment. You should not rely on an investment in our common stock to provide dividend income. We have never declared or paid cash dividends on shares of our common stock and do not anticipate that we will pay any dividends to holders of our common stock in the foreseeable future. Instead, we plan to retain any earnings to maintain and expand our existing operations. In addition, any future credit facility may contain terms prohibiting or limiting the amount of dividends that may be declared or paid on our common stock. Accordingly, investors must rely on sales of their common stock after price appreciation, which may never occur, as the only way to realize any return on their investment. As a result, investors seeking cash dividends should not purchase our common stock. If we fail to maintain proper and effective internal control over financial reporting, our operating results and our ability to operate our business could be harmed. Ensuring that we have adequate internal financial and accounting controls and procedures in place so that we can produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis is a costly and time-consuming effort that needs to be re-evaluated frequently. Our internal control over financial reporting is a process designed to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting and the preparation of financial statements in accordance with generally accepted accounting principles in the United States (“U.S. GAAP"). As a public company, we are required to incur additional costs and obligations in order to comply with SEC rules that implement Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Under these rules, beginning with our second Annual Report on Form 10-K after we become a public company, we are required to make a formal assessment of the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting, and once we cease to be an emerging growth company, we may be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. We are engaged in the process of documenting, reviewing and improving our internal controls and procedures for compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act. Implementing any appropriate changes to our internal controls may distract our officers and employees, entail substantial costs to modify our existing processes and take significant time to complete. These changes may not, however, be effective in maintaining the adequacy of our internal controls, and any failure to maintain that adequacy or consequent inability to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis could increase our operating costs and harm our business. In addition, investors’ perceptions that our internal controls are inadequate or that we are unable to produce accurate financial statements on a timely basis cause investors to lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and could cause the market price of our common stock to decline significantly. 89 Our disclosure controls and procedures may not prevent or detect all errors or acts of fraud. We are subject to the periodic reporting requirements of the Exchange Act. We designed our disclosure controls and procedures to reasonably assure that information we must disclose in reports we file or submit under the Exchange Act is accumulated and communicated to management, and recorded, processed, summarized and reported within the time periods specified in the rules and forms of the SEC. We believe that any disclosure controls and procedures or internal controls and procedures, no matter how well-conceived and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the objectives of the control system are met. These inherent limitations include the realities that judgments in decision-making can be faulty and that breakdowns can occur because of simple error or mistake. Additionally, controls can be circumvented by the individual acts of some persons, by collusion of two or more people or by an unauthorized override of the controls. Accordingly, because of the inherent limitations in our control system, misstatements due to error or fraud may occur and not be detected. If we experience material weaknesses in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls in the future, we may not be able to accurately or timely report our financial condition or results of operations, which may adversely affect investor confidence in us and, as a result, the value of our common stock. We may in the future discover material weaknesses in our system of internal financial and accounting controls and procedures that could result in a material misstatement of our financial statements. Our internal control over financial reporting will not prevent or detect all errors and all fraud. A control system, no matter how well designed and operated, can provide only reasonable, not absolute, assurance that the control system’s objectives will be met. Because of the inherent limitations in all control systems, no evaluation of controls can provide absolute assurance that misstatements due to error or fraud will not occur or that all control issues and instances of fraud will be detected. If we are not able to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, or if we are unable to maintain proper and effective internal controls over financial reporting, we may not be able to produce timely and accurate financial statements. If that were to happen, our investors could lose confidence in our reported financial information, the market price of our stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by the stock exchange on which our common stock is listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities. Provisions in our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law may have anti-takeover effects that could discourage an acquisition of us by others, even if an acquisition would be beneficial to our stockholders, and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws and Delaware law contain provisions that may have the effect of discouraging, delaying or preventing a change in control of us or changes in our management that stockholders may consider favorable, including transactions in which you might otherwise receive a premium for your shares. Our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws include provisions that: •authorize “blank check” preferred stock, which could be issued by our board of directors without stockholder approval and may contain voting, liquidation, dividend and other rights superior to our common stock; •create a classified board of directors whose members serve staggered three-year terms; •specify that special meetings of our stockholders can be called only by our board of directors; •prohibit stockholder action by written consent; •establish an advance notice procedure for stockholder approvals to be brought before an annual meeting of our stockholders, including proposed nominations of persons for election to our board of directors; •provide that vacancies on our board of directors may be filled only by a majority of directors then in office, even though less than a quorum; •provide that our directors may be removed only for cause; •specify that no stockholder is permitted to cumulate votes at any election of directors; •expressly authorize our board of directors to make, alter, amend or repeal our amended and restated bylaws; and •require supermajority votes of the holders of our common stock to amend specified provisions of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation and amended and restated bylaws. These provisions, alone or together, could delay or prevent hostile takeovers and changes in control or changes in our management. These provisions could also limit the price that investors might be willing to pay in the future for shares of our common stock, thereby depressing the market price of our common stock. In addition, because we are incorporated in the State of Delaware, we are governed by the provisions of Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law, which prohibits a person who owns in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock from merging 90 or combining with us for a period of three years after the date of the transaction in which the person acquired in excess of 15% of our outstanding voting stock, unless the merger or combination is approved in a prescribed manner. Any provision of our amended and restated certificate of incorporation, amended and restated bylaws or Delaware law that has the effect of delaying or deterring a change in control could limit the opportunity for our stockholders to receive a premium for their shares of our common stock and could also affect the price that some investors are willing to pay for our common stock. Our amended and restated bylaws designate certain courts as the sole and exclusive forum for certain types of actions and proceedings that may be initiated by our stockholders, which could limit our stockholders’ ability to obtain a favorable judicial forum for disputes with us or our directors, officers, or employees. Our amended and restated bylaws provide that, unless we consent in writing to an alternative forum, the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware will be the sole and exclusive forum for any state law claims for (i) any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf, (ii) any action asserting a claim of breach of, or a claim based on, fiduciary duty owed by any of our current or former directors, officers, and employees to us or our stockholders, (iii) any action asserting a claim arising pursuant to any provision of the Delaware General Corporation Law, our amended and restated certificate of incorporation or our amended and restated bylaws (including the interpretation, validity or enforceability thereof) or (iv) any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine (“Delaware Forum Provision”). The Delaware Forum Provision will not apply to any causes of action arising under the Securities Act or the Exchange Act. Our amended and restated bylaws further provide that, unless we consent in writing to the selection of an alternative forum, the federal district courts of the United States shall be the sole and exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause or causes of action arising under the Securities Act (“Federal Forum Provision”). In addition, our amended and restated bylaws provide that any person or entity purchasing or otherwise acquiring any interest in shares of our common stock is deemed to have notice of and consented to the foregoing provisions; provided, however, that stockholders cannot and will not be deemed to have waived our compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder. The Delaware Forum Provision and the Federal Forum Provision in our amended and restated bylaws may impose additional litigation costs on stockholders in pursuing any such claims. Additionally, the forum selection clauses in our amended and restated bylaws may limit our stockholders’ ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that they find favorable for disputes with us or our directors, officers or employees, which may discourage such lawsuits against us and our directors, officers and employees even though an action, if successful, might benefit our stockholders. In addition, while the Delaware Supreme Court and other state courts have upheld the validity of federal forum selection provisions purporting to require claims under the Securities Act be brought in federal court, there is uncertainty as to whether other courts will enforce our Federal Forum Provision. If the Federal Forum Provision is found to be unenforceable, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such matters. The Federal Forum Provision may also impose additional litigation costs on stockholders who assert that the provision is not enforceable or invalid. The Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware and the federal district courts of the United States may also reach different judgments or results than would other courts, including courts where a stockholder considering an action may be located or would otherwise choose to bring the action, and such judgments may be more or less favorable to us than our stockholders. General Risk Factors Unfavorable global economic conditions, political instability and geopolitical events could adversely affect our business, financial condition, stock price, and results of operations. Our business could be adversely affected by unstable economic and political conditions within the United States and foreign jurisdictions, including as a result of an economic downturn and geopolitical events, such as changes in or disruptions of U.S. governmental agencies, whether from a prolonged U.S. federal government shutdown or reduced resources, disruptions in capital markets, the potential for significant changes in U.S. federal policies or regulatory environment or other factors that affect the geopolitical landscape. The global credit and financial markets have also generally experienced extreme volatility and disruptions (including as a result of actual or perceived changes in interest rates, inflationary pressures and macroeconomic uncertainties), which has included severely diminished liquidity and credit availability, declines in consumer confidence, declines in economic growth, fluctuations in inflation rates, changes in interest rates, uncertainty about economic stability, global supply chain disruptions, and increases in unemployment rates. There can be no assurance that further deterioration in credit and financial markets and confidence in economic conditions will not occur, including as a result of heightened geopolitical tensions or increasing concerns regarding a potential global recession. A severe or prolonged economic downturn could result in a variety of risks to our business, including a decrease in the demand for our product candidates and in our ability to raise additional capital when needed on acceptable terms, if at all. The financial markets and the global economy may also be adversely affected by the current or anticipated impact of military conflicts, such as the ongoing conflicts in Iran, Ukraine and the Middle East, terrorism, or other geopolitical events. Sanctions imposed by the United States and other countries in response to such conflicts may also continue to adversely impact the financial markets and the global economy, and any economic countermeasures by the affected countries or others could exacerbate market and economic instability. Although the length and impact of the ongoing military conflicts is highly unpredictable, the ongoing conflicts in Iran, Ukraine and the Middle East have led to market disruptions, including significant volatility in commodity prices, credit and capital markets, as well as supply chain interruptions, which contributed to record inflation globally. We are continuing to monitor inflation, 91 the hostilities between the United States and Iran, as well as the situations in Ukraine and the Middle East and global capital markets and assessing their potential impact on our business, including the impact on the supply chains we rely on for the manufacture of our product and product candidates and related raw materials. Additionally, changes to policy implemented by the U.S. Congress, the current administration or any new administration have impacted and may in the future impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade relations, unemployment, immigration, healthcare, taxation, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas. For example, the implementation of tariffs by the U.S. government has led to increased trade and political tensions, between not only the U.S. and China, but also between the U.S. and other countries in the international community. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. For example, the BIOSECURE Act signed into law as part of the recently-enacted NDAA may restrict the ability of United States pharmaceutical companies to purchase services or products from, or otherwise collaborate with, certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the United States government. We continue to assess the legislation as it develops to determine whether it could have an effect on our contractual relationships. Any changes in political, trade, regulatory, and economic conditions, including U.S. trade policies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Until we know what policy changes are made, whether those policy changes are challenged and subsequently upheld by the court system and how those changes impact our business and the business of our competitors over the long term, we will not know if, overall, we will benefit from them or be negatively affected by them. Furthermore, any disruptions to our supply chain as a result of unfavorable global economic conditions, including due to geopolitical conflicts or public health crises, could negatively impact the timely execution of our ongoing and future clinical trials. In addition, current inflationary trends in the global economy may impact salaries and wages, costs of goods and transportation expenses, among other things, and recent and potential future disruptions in access to bank deposits or lending commitments due to bank failures may create market and economic instability. We cannot anticipate all of the ways in which the foregoing, and the current economic climate and financial market conditions generally, could adversely impact our business. Adverse developments affecting the financial services industry, such as actual events or concerns involving liquidity, defaults, or non-performance by financial institutions or transactional counterparties, could adversely affect our current and projected business operations and our financial condition and results of operations. Actual events involving limited liquidity, defaults, non-performance or other adverse developments that affect financial institutions, transactional counterparties or other companies in the financial services industry or the financial services industry generally, or concerns or rumors about any events of these kinds or other similar risks, have in the past and may in the future lead to market-wide liquidity problems. Although we assess our banking and customer relationships as we believe necessary or appropriate, our access to funding sources and other credit arrangements in amounts adequate to finance or capitalize our current and projected future business operations could be significantly impaired by factors that affect our Company, the financial institutions with which we have credit agreements or arrangements directly, or the financial services industry or economy in general. These factors could include, among others, events such as liquidity constraints or failures, the ability to perform obligations under various types of financial, credit or liquidity agreements or arrangements, disruptions or instability in the financial services industry or financial markets, or concerns or negative expectations about the prospects for companies in the financial services industry. The results of events or concerns that involve one or more of these factors could include a variety of material and adverse impacts on our current and projected business operations and our financial condition and results of operations. These could include, but may not be limited to, the following: •delayed access to deposits or other financial assets or the uninsured loss of deposits or other financial assets; •potential or actual breach of statutory, regulatory or contractual obligations, including obligations that require us to maintain letters of credit or other credit support arrangements; •termination of cash management arrangements and/or delays in accessing or actual loss of funds subject to cash management arrangements. In addition, investor concerns regarding the United States or international financial systems could result in less favorable commercial financing terms, including higher interest rates or costs and tighter financial and operating covenants, or systemic limitations on access to credit and liquidity sources, thereby making it more difficult for us to acquire financing on acceptable terms or at all. Any decline in available funding or access to our cash and liquidity resources could, among other risks, adversely impact our ability to meet our operating expenses, financial obligations or fulfill our other obligations, result in breaches of our financial and/or contractual obligations or result in violations of federal or state wage and hour laws. Any of these impacts, or any other impacts resulting from the factors described above or other related or similar factors not described above, could have material adverse impacts on our liquidity, our current and/or planned business operations, and our current or projected financial condition and results of operations. 92 In addition, any further deterioration in the macroeconomic economy or financial services industry could lead to losses or defaults by our suppliers, which in turn, could have a material adverse effect on our current and/or planned business operations and our current or projected results of operations and financial condition. For example, a customer may fail to make payments when due, default under their agreements with us, become insolvent or declare bankruptcy, or a supplier may determine that it will no longer deal with us as a customer. In addition, a customer or supplier could be adversely affected by any of the liquidity or other risks that are described above as factors that could result in material adverse impacts on the Company, including but not limited to delayed access or loss of access to uninsured deposits or loss of the ability to draw on existing credit facilities involving a troubled or failed financial institution. Any customer, collaborator or supplier bankruptcy or insolvency, or the failure of any customer or collaborator to make payments when due, or any breach or default by a customer, collaborator or supplier, or the loss of any significant supplier or collaborator relationships, could result in material losses to the Company and may have a material adverse impact on our business. If securities analysts do not publish research or reports about our business or if they publish negative evaluations of our stock, the price of our stock could decline. The trading market for our common stock will depend in part on the research and reports that industry or financial analysts publish about us or our business. If one or more of the analysts covering our business downgrade their evaluations of our stock or publishes inaccurate or unfavorable research about our business, the price of our stock could decline. If one or more of these analysts ceases coverage of our company or fails to publish reports on us regularly, we could lose visibility in the market for our stock, which in turn could cause our stock price and trading volume to decline. We may become involved in litigation and investigations that could divert management’s attention and harm our business, and insurance coverage may not be sufficient to cover all costs and damages. From time to time we may be subject to litigation claims and investigations from the SEC and other government agencies through the ordinary course of our business operations regarding, but not limited to, securities litigation, employment matters, security of patient and employee personal data, government-issued subpoenas, contractual relations with collaborators and licensors and intellectual property rights. In the past, securities class action litigation has often followed certain significant business transactions, such as the sale of a company or announcement of any other strategic transaction, the announcement of negative events, such as negative results from clinical trials, or periods of volatility in the market price of a company’s securities. These events may also result in or be concurrent with investigations by the SEC (which may not be publicly disclosed by the SEC or by us, particularly where the SEC or investigating body has made it clear that no wrongdoing has been alleged). In addition, we may be exposed to litigation or investigation even if no wrongdoing has occurred. Responding to litigations and investigations is usually expensive, and our insurance coverage many not be sufficient to cover the legal costs for doing so, as well as any damages for which we are ultimately held responsible. In addition, responding to a litigation or an investigation diverts management’s attention and resources, which could adversely affect our business and cash resources and our ability to consummate a potential strategic transaction or the ultimate value our stockholders receive in any such transaction. Our insurance policies are expensive and only protect us from some business risks, which will leave us exposed to significant uninsured liabilities. While we maintain commercial insurance at a level we believe is appropriate against certain risks commonly insured in the industry in which we operate, there is no guarantee that our insurer will cover costs or that we will be able to obtain the desired level of coverage on acceptable terms in the future. Some of the policies we currently maintain include property, general liability, crime insurance, workers’ compensation, and directors’ and officers’, employment practices and fiduciary liability insurance, clinical trial insurance, transportation insurance and umbrella insurance. We do not know, however, if we will be able to maintain insurance with adequate levels of coverage. Changes in the market conditions and our business operations may necessitate the addition of new insurance policies or change of our existing insurance policies. Any significant uninsured liability may require us to pay substantial amounts, which would adversely affect our financial position and results of operations. Our operations are vulnerable to interruption by disasters, terrorist activity, pandemics and other events beyond our control, which could harm our business. Our facilities are located in California. We have not undertaken a systematic analysis of the potential consequences to our business and financial results from a major flood, power loss, terrorist activity, pandemics or other regional or global disasters and generally do not have a recovery plan for such events. In addition, we do not carry sufficient insurance to compensate us for actual losses from interruption of our business that may occur, and any losses or damages incurred by us could harm our business. The occurrence of any of these business disruptions could seriously harm our operations and financial condition and increase our costs and expenses. Increased attention to, and evolving expectations for, environmental, social, and governance initiatives could increase our costs, harm our reputation, or otherwise adversely impact our business. Companies across industries are facing increasing scrutiny from a variety of stakeholders related to their environmental, climate change, social, and governance (“ESG”) and sustainability practices. Investor advocacy groups, certain institutional investors, investment funds, and other influential investors have increasingly focused on ESG practices and have placed increasing importance on the non-financial impacts of their investments. Expectations regarding voluntary ESG initiatives and disclosures may result in increased 93 costs (including but not limited to increased costs related to compliance, stakeholder engagement, contracting and insurance), enhanced compliance or disclosure obligations, or other adverse impacts to our business, financial condition, or results of operations. While we may at times engage in voluntary initiatives (such as voluntary disclosures, certifications, or goals, among others) to improve the ESG profile of the Company, such initiatives may be costly and may not have the desired effect. Moreover, we may not be able to successfully complete such initiatives due to factors that are within or outside of our control. Even if this is not the case, our actions may subsequently be determined to be insufficient by various stakeholders, and we may be subject to investor or regulator engagement on our ESG efforts, even if such initiatives are currently voluntary. Certain market participants, including major institutional investors and capital providers, use third-party benchmarks and scores to assess companies’ ESG profiles in making investment or voting decisions. Unfavorable ESG ratings could lead to increased negative investor sentiment towards us, which could negatively impact our share price as well as our access to and cost of capital. In addition, in recent years “anti-ESG” sentiment has gained momentum across the United States, with several states and Congress having proposed or enacted “anti-ESG” policies, legislation, or initiatives or issued related legal opinions, and the President having issued an executive order opposing diversity equity and inclusion (“DEI”) initiatives in the private sector. Such anti-ESG and anti-DEI-related policies, legislation, initiatives, litigation, legal opinions, and scrutiny could result in us facing additional compliance obligations, becoming the subject of investigations and enforcement actions, or sustaining reputational harm. Therefore, to the extent we take actions that are seen as positive to some investors, other investors may take issue with such actions or face regulatory pressure to refrain from investing in, or divest from, our business. To the extent ESG matters negatively impact our reputation, it may also impede our ability to compete as effectively to attract and retain employees, which may adversely impact our operations. In addition, we expect there will likely be increasing levels of regulation, disclosure-related and otherwise, with respect to ESG matters. For example, the SEC has issued rules that require companies to provide significantly expanded climate-related disclosures in their periodic reporting. The new climate disclosure rules were the subject of multiple legal challenges, and the SEC voluntarily stayed the climate disclosure rules, and on May 29, 2026, the SEC proposed the rescission of these rules. Even if the SEC rules are not rescinded or otherwise do not become effective, states or ex-U.S. jurisdictions in which we currently or may in the future operate may also have or adopt ESG or climate-related disclosure rules requiring similar or broader disclosure obligations. These and other changes in stakeholder expectations will likely lead to increased costs as well as scrutiny that could heighten all of the risks identified in this risk factor. Additionally, our business partners may be subject to similar expectations, which may augment or create additional risks, including risks that may not be known to us. The increasing use of social media platforms presents risks and challenges. We and our employees are increasingly utilizing social media tools as a means of communication both internally and externally. Despite our efforts to monitor evolving social media communication guidelines and comply with applicable rules, there is risk that the use of social media by us or our employees to communicate about our product candidates, operations, or business may cause us to be found in violation of applicable legal or contractual requirements. In addition, our employees may knowingly or inadvertently make use of social media in ways that may not comply with our social media policy or other legal or contractual requirements, which may give rise to liability, lead to the loss of trade secrets or other intellectual property, or result in public exposure of personal information of our employees, clinical trial patients, collaboration partners, and others, and which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial conditions and results of operations. Furthermore, negative posts or comments about us or our product candidates in social media could seriously damage our reputation, brand image and goodwill. In addition, it is possible for individuals or groups to target companies with disruptive social media campaigns related to a request for access to unapproved drugs for patients with significant unmet medical need. If we experience a similar social media campaign regarding our decision to provide or not provide access to our product candidates under an expanded access policy, our reputation may be negatively affected and our business may be harmed.