BioAge Labs, Inc. 10-K

10-K UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31 , 2025 OR ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM TO Commission File Number 001-42279 BIOAGE LABS, INC. (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter) Delaware 47-4721157 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 5885 Hollis Street , Suite 370 Emeryville , CA 94608 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: ( 510 ) 806-1445 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Common Stock, par value $0.00001 per share BIOA The Nasdaq Stock Market LLC Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES ☐ NO ☒ Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Act. YES ☐ NO ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934 during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. YES ☒ NO ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit such files). YES ☒ NO ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer,” “accelerated filer,” “smaller reporting company,” and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act. Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒ Emerging growth company ☒ If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐ If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES ☐ NO ☒ The aggregate market value of the voting and non-voting common equity held by non-affiliates of the Registrant, based on the closing price of the shares of common stock on The Nasdaq Global Select Market on June 30, 2025, the last business day of the Registrant's most recently completed second fiscal quarter, was approximately $ 112.7 million. The number of shares of Registrant’s Common Stock outstanding as of March 19, 2026 was 44,379,753 . DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE Portions of the Registrant’s Definitive Proxy Statement (“Proxy Statement”) relating to the 2026 Annual Meeting of Stockholders will be filed with the Commission within 120 days after the end of the Registrant’s 2025 fiscal year and are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Report. Auditor Firm ID: 185 Auditor Name: KPMG LLP Auditor Location: San Francisco, California Table of Contents Page PART I Item 1. Business 1 Item 1A. Risk Factors 57 Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 106 Item 1C. Cybersecurity 107 Item 2. Properties 108 Item 3. Legal Proceedings 108 Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 108 PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities 109 Item 6. [Reserved] 109 Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 110 Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 124 Item 8. Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 124 Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 124 Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 124 Item 9B. Other Information 125 Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions that Prevent Inspections 125 PART III Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 126 Item 11. Executive Compensation 126 Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters 126 Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 126 Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 126 PART IV Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules 127 Item 16. Form 10-K Summary 129 Signatures 130 SPECIAL NOTE REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS This Annual Report on Form 10-K (this Annual Report) contains forward-looking statements. In some cases, you can identify forward-looking statements by terms such as “aim,” “may,” “will,” “should,” “expect,” “forecast,” “plan,” “anticipate,” “could,” “intend,” “target,” “project,” “contemplate,” “believe,” “estimate,” “predict,” “potential” or “continue” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions, although not all forward-looking statements contain these words. All statements other than statements of historical fact contained in this Annual Report, including without limitation statements regarding our plans to develop and commercialize our product candidates, including BGE-102 and our APJ programs, the potential for BGE-102 as a treatment for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk reduction and diabetic macular edema and the expected timeline for data readouts from our ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial, the timing and results of our ongoing or planned preclinical studies and clinical trials, risks associated with clinical trials, including our ability to adequately manage clinical activities for BGE-102 and our APJ programs, unexpected concerns that may arise from additional data or analysis obtained during clinical trials, the timing of and our ability to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals, the clinical utility of our future product candidates, our commercialization, marketing and manufacturing capabilities and strategy, our expectations about the willingness of healthcare professionals to use our product candidates, the sufficiency of our cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities, general economic conditions, the impact of industry and market conditions on our operations, including fluctuating interest rates and inflation, increased volatility in the debt and equity markets, legislative or regulatory healthcare reforms in the United States, significant political, trade or regulatory developments, including tariffs, federal government shutdowns, or shifting priorities within the U.S. Food and Drug Administration, cybersecurity incidents, and global regional conflicts, and the plans and objectives of management for future operations and capital expenditures are forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements in this Annual Report are only predictions and are based largely on our current expectations and projections about future events and financial trends that we believe may affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. These forward-looking statements speak only as of the date of this Annual Report and are subject to a number of known and unknown risks, uncertainties and assumptions, including those described under the sections in this Annual Report entitled “Risk Factors” and “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and elsewhere in this Annual Report. Because forward-looking statements are inherently subject to risks and uncertainties, some of which cannot be predicted or quantified and some of which are beyond our control, you should not rely on these forward-looking statements as predictions of future events. The events and circumstances reflected in our forward-looking statements may not be achieved or occur and actual results could differ materially from those projected in the forward-looking statements. Moreover, we operate in an evolving environment. New risk factors and uncertainties may emerge from time to time, and it is not possible for management to predict all risk factors and uncertainties. Except as required by applicable law, we do not plan to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements contained herein, whether as a result of any new information, future events, changed circumstances or otherwise. We intend the forward-looking statements contained in this Annual Report to be covered by the safe harbor provisions for forward-looking statements contained in Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act. i PART I Item 1. Business. Overview We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company developing therapeutic product candidates for metabolic diseases by targeting the biology of human aging. Our technology platform and differentiated human datasets enable us to identify promising targets based on insights into molecular changes that drive aging. In January 2025, we announced the nomination of our lead program, BGE-102, a potent, structurally novel, orally available, brain-penetrant small-molecule NLRP3 inhibitor. BGE-102 has a distinct mechanism and binding site from other NLRP3 inhibitors in development with issued patents covering both composition of matter and claims for the unique binding site. In December 2025, we announced that BGE-102 was well-tolerated in Single Ascending Dose (SAD) and initial Multiple Ascending Dose (MAD) cohorts, with a pharmacokinetic profile supporting once-daily oral dosing, strong target engagement and high brain penetration. We intend to advance BGE-102 in two therapeutic areas: cardiometabolic disease and ophthalmology. Our first therapeutic area for BGE-102 is cardiometabolic disease, with a focus on atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk reduction. Chronic systemic inflammation, as measured by high-sensitivity C-reactive protein (hsCRP), is an independent risk factor for cardiovascular events that is not adequately addressed by current lipid-lowering and antihypertensive therapies. In January 2026, we announced additional positive interim Phase 1 data, demonstrating potential for best-in-class hsCRP reduction in participants with elevated cardiovascular risk. In obese participants with elevated hsCRP, BGE-102 demonstrated an 86% median reduction in hsCRP at Day 14, with 93% of participants achieving hsCRP levels below 2 mg/L — the threshold associated with a 25% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events. This level of hsCRP reduction is comparable to injectable anti-IL-6 monoclonal antibodies in clinical development for ASCVD, but achieved with once-daily oral dosing. We anticipate full Phase 1 SAD / MAD clinical trial results in the first half of 2026. We plan to initiate a Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in patients with obesity and elevated hsCRP in the first half of 2026, with results anticipated by 2026 year end. Our second therapeutic area for BGE-102 is ophthalmology. Diabetic macular edema (DME) is our first proof-of-concept indication in this area. DME affects approximately 1 million patients in the United States, and current intravitreal therapies face significant unmet need due to high injection burden and a substantial refractory population — approximately 45% of patients demonstrate refractoriness to anti-vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) therapy. In a preclinical model of DME, oral BGE-102 demonstrated dose-dependent preservation of retinal vascular integrity, achieving near-complete protection from vascular leakage and up to 90% preservation of microvascular integrity. We plan to initiate a Phase 1b/2a proof-of-concept trial in DME in mid-2026 with results anticipated in mid-2027. The goal is to demonstrate ocular target engagement, supporting future development across inflammation-driven retinal diseases. Beyond NLRP3 inhibition, we are also developing novel apelin receptor APJ agonists for obesity, including programs targeting both oral and parenteral (subcutaneous) administration. In preclinical obesity models, APJ agonism has demonstrated the ability to more than double the weight loss induced by a glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor (GLP-1R) agonist while also restoring healthy body composition and improving muscle function. In June 2025, we announced an option agreement with JiKang Therapeutics for a novel APJ agonist antibody, as well as the filing of a U.S. provisional patent for novel small molecule APJ agonists. We intend to file the first Investigational New Drug applications (INDs) for an APJ program by 2026 year end. We are also advancing earlier stage platform-derived programs in collaboration with Eli Lilly and Company (Lilly), and have an ongoing target discovery collaboration with Novartis Pharma AG (Novartis). 1 Our approach: targeting human aging biology to treat chronic metabolic diseases The burden of many serious and chronic diseases — including cardiovascular disease and diabetes — increases with age. Age is a key risk factor for mortality from many chronic diseases in the United States, including cardiometabolic diseases like heart disease and diabetes. (Source: National Center for Health Statistics). 2 However, there is substantial natural variation in the human population, resulting in a broad range of aging trajectories and outcomes, with some people experiencing much longer lifespans as well as delayed disease onset. We created our company to identify biological pathways associated with longer, healthier human lifespans and to develop pharmaceutical products that can modulate these pathways with the intent to prevent and reverse specific diseases, focusing on cardiometabolic diseases. We capture a range of aging outcomes in our human aging cohorts, including functional and cognitive decline, disease incidence and mortality. In this example, deep, serial profiling of circulating proteins in these participants was used to understand the biology that drives these outcomes. Our approach starts with human data. We examine the impact of the molecular changes that happen naturally as people age and study how these changes drive both functional decline (e.g., loss of muscle strength) and disease risk (e.g., obesity, insulin resistance, dyslipidemia, and hypertension). To develop new insights into the biological drivers of aging, we have generated proprietary longitudinal human datasets based on exclusive access to a unique resource: serial biobanked human samples coupled with health records and functional measurements collected for up to 50 years, capturing individual aging trajectories measured over several decades. We analyze these samples using state-of-the-art molecular profiling technologies, 3 measuring thousands of biologically relevant molecules, and then apply computational tools to the resulting data to extract potential drivers of a long and healthy lifespan. The BioAge platform encompasses over 150 million molecular data points spanning over 25 thousand individual participant profiles and over 50 years of follow-up. We have selected chronic cardiometabolic diseases as our primary focus within age-related chronic diseases, given their high prevalence and resulting potential for impact on population health. Prevalence of major cardiometabolic disease in the United States Chronic cardiometabolic diseases also represent outsized commercial opportunities. For instance, according to third-party estimates, the global market for GLP-1R agonists, including those used to treat diabetes, is expected to grow to $150 billion by 2031. 4 Our Pipeline We are building a pipeline of platform-derived therapeutics targeting chronic cardiometabolic disease. Our lead program is BGE-102, a potent, structurally novel, orally available, brain-penetrant small-molecule NLRP3 inhibitor. We expect to announce full Phase 1 SAD / MAD clinical trial results in the first half of 2026. We are initially developing BGE-102 for patients with cardiovascular risk factors and DME. • For cardiovascular risk, we intend to initiate a dose-ranging Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in the first half of 2026 in patients with obesity and elevated hsCRP. Approximately 160 patients will be randomized BGE-102 or placebo for 12 weeks. The primary endpoint is percent change in hsCRP. Results are anticipated by 2026 year end. • For DME, we intend to initiate a Phase 1b/2a proof-of-concept trial in mid-2026 in patients with DME. Approximately 90 patients will be randomized across groups; BGE-102 will be assessed as an adjunctive therapy to intravitreal anti-VEGF treatment and as a monotherapy. The goal of the trial is to demonstrate target engagement in the eye. Results are anticipated in mid-2027. We are also developing novel apelin receptor APJ agonists for obesity, including programs targeting both oral and parenteral (subcutaneous) administration. We intend to file the first IND for an APJ program by 2026 year end. We are advancing several additional platform targets, currently in molecule discovery stage in collaboration with Lilly, which we believe have the potential to transform treatment of cardiometabolic disease. We plan to expand this pipeline over time, both internally and through our target discovery collaboration with Novartis. Our portfolio of product candidates and ongoing collaborations are summarized in the figure below: Our Team We have assembled a leadership team of experts in aging biology and drug development. Our senior team consists of the following members: • Kristen Fortney, Ph.D., our Chief Executive Officer and co-founder. Dr. Fortney has extensive experience in aging biology, genetics and bioinformatics and systems biology from her work at Stanford and the University of Toronto. • Eric Morgen, M.D., our Chief Operating Officer and co-founder. Dr. Morgen was previously on the faculty at the University of Toronto, where his research focused on biomarker discovery and characterization in high-dimensional datasets from human cohorts. 5 • Dov Goldstein, M.D., our Chief Financial Officer. Dr. Goldstein previously served as Chief Financial Officer at Vicuron Pharmaceuticals Inc. and Loxo Oncology Inc., as well as a Managing Partner at Aisling Capital. He was most recently the Chief Financial Officer and Chief Business Officer of Indapta Therapeutics, Inc. • Paul Rubin, M.D., our Chief Medical Officer. Dr. Rubin has over 35 years of experience in the biotechnology industry and has led 12 compounds to U.S. approval, with five led from discovery through approval, including Lunesta ® and Xopenex ® . He most recently served as Executive Vice President Research and Development at miRagen Therapeutics, Inc. and was previously Chief Medical Officer at XOMA Corporation and Executive Vice President Research and Development at Sepracor. • Ann Neale, our Chief Development Officer. Ms. Neale has over 30 years of experience in the biotechnology industry. She was most recently Senior Vice President of Development Operations at Principia BioPharma Inc. (acquired by Sanofi S.A.), where she led operations and resourcing strategy for multiple global early- and late-phase clinical programs. • Peng Leong, Ph.D., our Chief Business Officer. Dr. Leong has extensive experience in the biotech industry, previously serving in healthcare investment banking at Piper Jaffray and as Head of General Medicine Business Development at Merck KgaA and Chief Business Officer at Kazia Therapeutics Limited. • BJ Sullivan, Ph.D., our Chief Strategy Officer. Dr. Sullivan was previously in L.E.K. Consulting’s life sciences practice, where he advised biopharma companies on growth strategy and M&A. • George Hartman, Ph.D., our Senior Vice President, Chemistry. Dr. Hartman is a co-founder of Novira Therapeutics, Inc. and previously served as executive director of medicinal chemistry at Merck & Co., Inc. where he and his group identified and brought 12 drug candidates into Phase 2 or Phase 3 clinical trials. Our Strategy Our goal is to develop a focused portfolio of therapies for cardiometabolic disease by targeting the biology of human aging. Below is a summary of key product candidate and platform differentiation. Our strategy is to: • Apply novel insights into aging biology to build a pipeline of therapeutics to transform the treatment of chronic cardiometabolic diseases. Our platform provides unique insights into human aging biology spanning over 50 years. These insights enabled the identification of NLRP3 and apelin as targets. We also have several discovery-stage programs targeting this novel biology, which we will continue to advance through our ongoing collaborations with Lilly and Novartis. We plan to grow this pipeline over time, both internally and potentially through additional partnerships with pharmaceutical companies that have complementary datasets and capabilities. 6 • Efficiently advance our lead program, BGE-102, a potent, structurally novel, orally available, brain-penetrant small-molecule NLRP3 inhibitor in cardiometabolic disease and ophthalmology. BGE-102 has demonstrated potential best-in-class potency and efficacy in reducing hsCRP and other inflammatory markers in our Phase 1 trial. We plan to initiate a cardiovascular risk Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in patients with obesity and elevated hsCRP in the first half of 2026 and expect to report results by 2026 year end. We are also pursuing diabetic macular edema as a second initial indication, with a Phase 1b/2a proof-of-concept trial planned to begin in mid-2026, with results anticipated in mid-2027. • Advance both oral and parenteral apelin receptor APJ agonists as a novel exercise mimetic approach for the treatment of obesity. We believe that APJ agonism has the potential to transform the treatment of obesity by increasing weight loss quantity and quality, including improved body composition and tolerability. • Selectively partner our product candidates to maximize patient impact and shareholder value. According to third-party estimates, the global market opportunity for cardiometabolic diseases is very large, with GLP-1Rs and incretins for obesity alone expected to grow to $150 billion by 2031. Given the resulting activity and investment of pharmaceutical companies in the therapeutic area, we may selectively partner our product candidates to accelerate the path to market in multiple large indications and maximize shareholder value. BGE-102: a Potential Best-in-Class NLRP3 Inhibitor NLRP3 and inflammation — a predictor of decreased longevity NLRP3 is a component of a multi-protein complex referred to as the inflammasome, part of the innate immune system. Activation of the NLRP3 inflammasome leads to the secretion of inflammatory cytokines interleukin 1 beta (IL-1ß) and interleukin 18 (IL-18). However, NLRP3 can become hyperactivated in certain disease states, resulting in sustained cytokine release and chronic sterile inflammation. NLRP3 dysregulation: in certain disease states, intrinsic stimuli like cellular stress and excess nutrients can result in NLRP3 hyperactivation, resulting in sustained cytokine cleavage and a chronic inflammatory state. 7 We found that increased transcription of genes for NLRP3, IL-1ß, and IL-18 in our human aging cohorts was associated with significantly increased all-cause mortality risk. These findings align with human genetic evidence from Mendelian randomization studies, which demonstrate that a one standard deviation increase in NLRP3 expression is associated with up to a 70% increase in heart failure risk. Additionally, gain-of-function mutations in NLRP3 have been associated with reduced lean mass, impaired body composition, and accelerated atherosclerosis. Consistent with our findings that NLRP3 can have detrimental effects on human longevity, previous studies have shown that genetic deletion of NLRP3 significantly extended mouse lifespan and also improved healthspan as measured by parameters such as muscle strength including muscle size and wire hang latency to fall, and cognitive function such as preserved contextual memory. Levels of NLRP3-associated proteins (principal component) are inversely related to mortality risk in our human aging cohorts (left). Consistently, in a third-party preclinical study, knockout of the NLRP3 gene in mice significantly extends lifespan (n = 10 mice per group) (right). (Source: Marín-Aguilar et al. 2020). 8 BGE-102, our lead program BGE-102 is a potent, orally available, structurally novel, brain-penetrant small-molecule NLRP3 inhibitor discovered through screening of a HitGen DNA-encoded chemical library and optimized through structure-activity relationship studies. Through a collaboration with Dr. Matthias Geyer at the University of Bonn, we identified a binding site on NLRP3 that is distinct from previously described inhibitors, including the reference compound MCC950, as confirmed by cryo-electron microscopy. Unlike MCC950 and related inhibitors, which have been reported to inhibit NLRP3 ATPase activity, BGE-102 has not demonstrated ATPase inhibition in our in vitro assays, suggesting a fundamentally distinct mechanism that may offer advantages in specificity or side effect profile. BGE-102 has been shown to exhibit robust potency and favorable pharmacokinetic properties. In human ex vivo whole blood stimulation assays, BGE-102 achieves an IC90 (the concentration at which 90% target engagement is achieved) of 1.8 nanomolar for IL-1β. At 60 mg once daily, mean trough plasma concentrations provide approximately 24-hour IC90 coverage and ≥90% suppression of IL-1β. The compound penetrates the central nervous system, with a mean brain-to-plasma concentration ratio (Kp,uuCSF) of approximately 0.7 measured after 14 days of 120 mg once-daily dosing, exceeding the estimated IC90 for IL-1β suppression in the central nervous system. The safety margin at the 60 mg dose, based on exposures at Day 14 in the healthy volunteer MAD cohort, ranges from 42-fold to 90-fold relative to the no-observed-adverse-effect level (NOAEL) in 3-month GLP toxicology studies. 9 Our intellectual property portfolio includes composition of matter claims and claims covering the novel NLRP3 binding site, with patent protection extending through 2045 prior to patent term restoration. Phase 1 clinical trial results Trial design We are conducting a Phase 1 clinical trial designed to evaluate the safety, tolerability, pharmacokinetics, and pharmacodynamics of BGE-102 in both healthy volunteers and individuals with obesity. The entire study has been conducted in a clinical trial unit. The trial consisted of SAD cohorts, MAD cohorts in healthy volunteers, and ongoing MAD cohorts in obese participants with elevated baseline hsCRP. BGE-102 has met key objectives to date. We anticipate completion of all Phase 1 cohorts and a full data readout in the first half of 2026. 10 Safety profile and tolerability In our Phase 1 trials, BGE-102 has been well tolerated across all completed cohorts. All adverse events observed to date have been mild to moderate in severity, self-limited in nature, and without apparent dose-dependency. We have observed no dose-limiting toxicities in any cohort. Pharmacokinetics Single dose pharmacokinetic studies demonstrated dose-proportional exposure across the 10 mg to 120 mg dose range, indicating linear pharmacokinetics within the studied dose range. 11 Upon multiple daily dosing, BGE-102 exhibits accumulation with once-daily dosing. Trough plasma concentrations reached approximate steady state by Day 14 of dosing, where mean trough concentrations at both the 60 mg and 120 mg once-daily doses exceeded the human IL-1β IC90. CNS Exposure A key differentiator of BGE-102 is its demonstrated ability to cross the blood-brain barrier and achieve therapeutically meaningful concentrations in cerebrospinal fluid (CSF). On Day 14 of MAD dosing at 60 mg once daily, mean CSF concentrations of BGE-102 approximated the human IL-1β IC90. At the 120 mg dose, mean CSF concentrations exceeded the IC90. 12 This CNS exposure differentiates BGE-102 from peripherally selective NLRP3 inhibitors and potentially enables BGE-102 to address neuroinflammatory indications. Target engagement: IL-1β suppression Ex vivo whole blood stimulation assays confirmed robust and sustained target engagement across all dosing cohorts. In the 60 mg MAD cohort, BGE-102 achieved 90% suppression of IL-1β at trough concentrations on Day 14. In the 120 mg MAD cohort in healthy volunteers, IL-1β suppression reached 98% at trough on Day 14. Time-course pharmacodynamic data from the 120 mg cohort demonstrate that near-maximal IL-1β suppression was achieved by Day 7 and maintained throughout the entire 24-hour dosing interval, confirming sustained target engagement with once-daily dosing. 13 Inflammatory biomarkers in obese subjects with elevated baseline hsCRP In addition to healthy volunteers, we are conducting two additional MAD cohorts in obese patients with elevated baseline hsCRP. In these cohorts, we are evaluating circulating biomarkers of systemic inflammation. Results from the first cohort, 120 mg once daily, are reported here. In the obese subjects, IL-1β suppression measured 93% at trough on Day 14, confirming that robust target engagement is also observed in subjects with elevated baseline hsCRP. 14 In obese subjects, BGE-102 achieved a median reduction in hsCRP of 86% by Day 14. The effect was evident earlier, with a median 83% reduction already observed on Day 7, suggesting rapid anti-inflammatory activity. Note: median values, error bars show IQR (Q1-Q3); median baseline hsCRP 4.85 mg/L for active treatment and 4.25 mg/L for placebo. By Day 14, 93% of subjects receiving BGE-102 (13 of 14 subjects) achieved hsCRP levels below 2 mg/L. This threshold is clinically significant: in the landmark CANTOS trial (Canakinumab Anti-inflammatory Thrombosis Outcomes Study), participants who achieved on-treatment hsCRP below 2 mg/L experienced a 25% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE; hazard ratio 0.75, p<0.0001), while those who failed to achieve this threshold showed no significant benefit from anti-inflammatory therapy, establishing hsCRP normalization as a meaningful marker of therapeutic response. Furthermore, 71% of participants achieved hsCRP levels at or below 1 mg/L, a level associated with the lowest tertile of inflammatory risk in population studies. Note: median baseline hsCRP 4.85 mg/L for active treatment and 4.25 mg/L for placebo. 15 IL-6, a cytokine downstream of IL-1β signaling and a driver of hsCRP production, was also substantially reduced. At Day 7, BGE-102-treated subjects exhibited a median reduction in plasma IL-6 of 69%, compared to a 5% reduction in placebo recipients. By Day 14, the median IL-6 reduction in BGE-102 recipients was 58%, whereas placebo participants showed a 13% increase in IL-6 levels. Note: measurements performed using the Alamar NULISA platform given higher sensitivity below 2.5 pg/mL; in the median values, error bars show IQR (Q1-Q3); median baseline IL-6 2.3 pg/mL for active treatment and 1.3 pg/mL for placebo. Fibrinogen, another circulating biomarker of systemic inflammation and an independent risk factor for thrombotic events, was reduced by a median of 30% at Day 14 in BGE-102 recipients, compared to a 1% increase in placebo recipients. Note: median values, error bars show IQR (Q1-Q3); median baseline fibrinogen 331 mg/dL for active treatment and 290 mg/dL for placebo. 16 In two participants with elevated baseline CSF IL-6 (>7 pg/mL), BGE-102 reduced CSF IL-6 levels by 84% at Day 14, with a corresponding 62% reduction in plasma IL-6. This finding demonstrates functional pharmacodynamic activity within the central nervous system and suggests that BGE-102 may have utility in neuroinflammatory conditions where NLRP3 activation contributes to pathology. Note: *IL-6 levels >7 pg/mL in the CSF are considered elevated; corresponding decrease in the plasma was 62%; measurements performed using the Alamar NULISA platform. Anticipated development milestones We anticipate completion of the Phase 1 trial with a full data readout in the first half of 2026. We subsequently intend to advance BGE-102 for both cardiometabolic disease and ophthalmology. In the first half of 2026, we plan to initiate a Phase 2a cardiovascular risk proof-of-concept trial in patients with obesity and elevated hsCRP, with results expected by 2026 year end. In mid-2026, we plan to initiate a Phase 1b/2a proof-of-concept trial in patients with DME, with results anticipated in mid-2027. Atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease opportunity Burden of cardiovascular disease and unmet need Cardiovascular disease remains the leading cause of death globally, responsible for approximately 20 million deaths annually. Within the spectrum of cardiovascular disease, ASCVD represents a major and growing burden. ASCVD is characterized by the progressive accumulation of cholesterol-laden plaques within arterial walls. These atherosclerotic plaques are inherently unstable and may rupture, triggering thrombotic events that manifest clinically as myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, or sudden cardiac death. Current therapeutic management of ASCVD focuses primarily on lipid modification through statins, PCSK9 inhibitors, and related agents; blood pressure management through antihypertensive agents; and antiplatelet therapy with aspirin and P2Y12 inhibitors. These therapies have substantially reduced cardiovascular morbidity and mortality over the past several decades. However, despite the widespread use and optimization of these evidence-based therapies, substantial residual cardiovascular risk persists in treated populations. This residual risk — affecting patients even after optimization of lipid and blood pressure targets — is increasingly attributed to chronic systemic inflammation, a pathway that current cardiovascular therapeutics do not adequately address. The resulting patient population with residual inflammatory risk is large and clinically important, currently lacking specific anti-inflammatory therapeutics in routine cardiovascular practice. 17 Inflammation and high-sensitivity C-reactive protein as independent cardiovascular risk factors A growing body of evidence supports inflammation as an independent driver of ASCVD. hsCRP, a circulating biomarker of systemic inflammation, has emerged as a robust predictor of cardiovascular risk that is independent of traditional lipid-based risk factors. The Women's Health Study, a prospective cohort study of approximately 28,000 women followed for 30 years and published in the New England Journal of Medicine, provides compelling evidence for the independent predictive value of hsCRP. In this study, women in the highest quintile of baseline hsCRP had a 67% increased risk of major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE) — comprising myocardial infarction, ischemic stroke, and cardiovascular death — compared to women in the lowest quintile (hazard ratio 1.67). Notably, this risk gradient exceeded the risk gradient observed for low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol (hazard ratio 1.37) and lipoprotein(a) (hazard ratio 1.32), establishing hsCRP as a powerful cardiovascular risk predictor that may exceed traditional lipid-based risk factors. Adapted from Ridker et al. 2024. Results for Fine-Gray model, adjusted for age and covariables. Clinical validation that targeting inflammation can reduce cardiovascular events was provided by the CANTOS trial , a large, prospective, randomized controlled trial of canakinumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting IL-1β, a cytokine directly downstream of NLRP3, in patients with prior myocardial infarction and elevated hsCRP. In CANTOS, participants who achieved on-treatment hsCRP levels below 2 mg/L experienced a 25% reduction in major adverse cardiovascular events (hazard ratio 0.75, p<0.0001) compared to those who did not achieve hsCRP normalization. Importantly, participants who failed to 18 normalize hsCRP to below 2 mg/L showed no significant benefit from the active treatment, establishing hsCRP normalization as a meaningful therapeutic goal for reducing cardiovascular risk. The magnitude of residual inflammatory risk is substantial. At any given LDL cholesterol level, patients with elevated hsCRP have increased cardiovascular risk. This observation underscores that inflammation contributes to cardiovascular risk independently of dyslipidemia and, moreover, additively increases risk when elevated LDL cholesterol and elevated hsCRP coexist. NLRP3 inhibition as a cardiovascular target: mechanistic advantages over downstream cytokine inhibition. 19 The NLRP3 inflammasome occupies a unique position within the inflammatory cascade relevant to cardiovascular disease, serving as a nodal point upstream of multiple inflammatory mediators implicated in atherosclerotic disease progression. Upon activation, NLRP3 triggers the secretion of IL-1β, which in turn drives the production of IL-6, which subsequently stimulates the hepatic production of hsCRP and fibrinogen. NLRP3 inhibition therefore targets the inflammatory cascade upstream of both IL-1β and IL-6, with the potential to suppress multiple downstream inflammatory pathways more comprehensively than selective targeting of any single cytokine. Beyond its effects on IL-1β and the IL-6/hsCRP axis, NLRP3 inhibition offers potential mechanistic advantages that may prove clinically relevant. First, NLRP3 activation also drives the production of IL-18, an inflammatory cytokine that has emerged as an independent predictor of cardiovascular risk and that is not addressed by current anti-IL-6 or anti-IL-1β therapeutic approaches. In the CANTOS trial, patients in the highest tertile of baseline IL-18 had approximately 45% higher risk of cardiovascular death compared to patients in the lowest tertile (hazard ratio 1.44, P < 0.0001; Ridker et al., European Heart Journal 2020), establishing IL-18 as an independent contributor to cardiovascular mortality. A therapy that suppresses both IL-18 and the IL-6/hsCRP axis through NLRP3 inhibition may therefore provide more comprehensive anti-inflammatory benefit than selective IL-6 or IL-1β blockade. Second, NLRP3 inflammasome activation can trigger pyroptosis, a form of inflammatory cell death that releases intracellular contents and may contribute to atherosclerotic plaque destabilization. NLRP3 inhibitors can prevent pyroptosis, whereas anti-IL-6 and anti-IL-1β monoclonal antibodies do not address this mechanism. Pyroptosis inhibition may therefore represent an additional mechanism through which NLRP3 inhibition reduces cardiovascular risk. 20 BGE-102's 86% median hsCRP reduction (obese participants with elevated baseline hsCRP, Day 14 of 120 mg QD dosing) is comparable to biologic approaches targeting the IL-1β and IL-6 pathways, and this effect was achieved with once-daily oral dosing rather than injectable administration. The cardiovascular market opportunity Cardiovascular risk reduction represents a substantial and growing therapeutic market. Approximately 25 million adults in the United States have a diagnosis of ASCVD, of whom approximately 60% — representing roughly 15 million individuals — have elevated hsCRP and may be candidates for anti-inflammatory therapy. The global market for lipid-lowering therapies is expected to reach approximately $50 billion by 2035, and an oral anti-inflammatory agent that reduces cardiovascular risk through a complementary mechanism could meaningfully expand the overall cardiovascular therapeutics market. 21 The distinction between an oral small-molecule inhibitor and injectable biologic therapies may represent a substantial practical and commercial advantage. All anti-IL-6 inhibitors in cardiovascular development are injectable monoclonal antibodies, administered subcutaneously on a monthly or quarterly basis. In contrast, BGE-102 is an oral, once-daily small molecule. The vast majority of patients treated for cardiovascular risk receive their care in settings where oral medications are the standard modality. An oral once-daily anti-inflammatory agent may therefore enable broader adoption and prescribing across both cardiology and primary care. Additionally, an oral formulation creates potential for fixed-dose combination products with statins, PCSK9 inhibitors, and GLP-1 receptor agonists — combinations that may improve patient convenience and treatment adherence, which are critical considerations in chronic cardiovascular disease management. Phase 2a proof-of-concept trial in cardiovascular risk We plan to initiate a dose-ranging Phase 2a cardiovascular risk proof-of-concept trial of BGE-102 in patients with obesity and elevated hsCRP in the first half of 2026. This trial is designed to confirm and extend the hsCRP and inflammatory biomarker effects observed in our Phase 1 obese cohorts and to further characterize the safety and tolerability of BGE-102 over an extended treatment period. The Phase 2a trial will be a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study enrolling approximately 160 patients with a 12-week treatment period. The primary endpoint is percent change in hsCRP from baseline to Week 12. Results are anticipated by 2026 year end. 22 Ophthalmology — Diabetic Macular Edema and Geographic Atrophy Our second target therapeutic area for BGE-102 is ophthalmology. NLRP3 inflammasome activation sits at the center of multiple retinal diseases, including DME and geographic atrophy (GA), which are prevalent conditions with substantial unmet needs. 23 BGE-102 possesses several characteristics that may differentiate it for retinal diseases: it is administered orally as a once-daily medication, eliminating the injection burden that limits long-term adherence with current intravitreal therapies and allowing simultaneous treatment of both eyes. We have demonstrated in preclinical studies across multiple species, including non-human primates, that BGE-102 achieves therapeutic concentrations in retinal tissue following oral administration. NLRP3 inhibition addresses both systemic and local drivers of retinal disease, and oral NLRP3 inhibition has the potential to have a broader effect than intravitreal anti-IL-6 approaches by sitting upstream in the inflammatory cascade while simultaneously addressing systemic disease drivers that local intravitreal therapies do not. DME is our first proof-of-concept indication in ophthalmology. Diabetic macular edema Disease burden and unmet medical need. DME represents one of the leading causes of vision loss in the working-age population, affecting approximately 1 million patients in the United States. DME develops as hyperglycemia and associated systemic inflammation drive vascular leakage within the retina, impairing central vision and reducing quality of life. Approximately 70% of DME patients develop vision-threatening edema in both eyes within one year of diagnosis. 24 Current standard-of-care therapies for DME rely predominantly on intravitreal anti-VEGF injections and intravitreal corticosteroid implants. These approaches face substantial clinical and practical limitations. Approximately 45% of DME patients demonstrate refractoriness to anti-VEGF therapy despite sustained treatment, suggesting that targeting a single effector molecule does not address the full pathophysiology of the disease. Adherence to the demanding injection regimen is challenging: approximately 50% of patients discontinue anti-VEGF injections after an average of six months, resulting in suboptimal real-world outcomes. Additionally, current ocular therapies do not address insulin resistance, a systemic metabolic factor that our analysis indicates is a key driver of DME. NLRP3 inflammasome in DME. In DME, hyperglycemia and oxidative stress activate NLRP3. Release of IL-1β and IL-18 stimulates IL-6 production in retinal tissue, which in turn promotes VEGF expression and vascular leakage; this process is exacerbated by pyroptosis in endothelial cells, compromising microvascular integrity. NLRP3 thus represents a mechanistic bridge between systemic metabolic dysregulation in diabetes and local pathological vascular permeability in the retina. Growing clinical evidence supports the anti-inflammatory strategy in retinal disease. Several programs have explored intravitreal anti-IL-6 therapies in DME; studies by Roche, Kodiak, and EyePoint have demonstrated that reducing IL-6 in the eye can produce rapid improvements in best-corrected visual acuity and central subfield thickness within four to eight weeks of treatment. We believe that oral NLRP3 inhibition has the potential to have a broader effect by sitting upstream in the inflammatory cascade, while simultaneously addressing systemic metabolic drivers. Preclinical evidence for BGE-102 in DME. In a streptozotocin-induced diabetic mouse model, oral BGE-102 demonstrated dose-dependent preservation of retinal vascular permeability. Additionally, BGE-102 preserved blood-retina barrier tight junction proteins, including claudin-5. In diet-induced obese mice, BGE-102 improved insulin sensitivity as measured by HOMA-IR (Homeostatic Model Assessment for Insulin Resistance) to a degree comparable to semaglutide, a GLP-1 receptor agonist with well-established metabolic benefits. This improvement phenocopies the metabolic phenotype of Nlrp3-knockout mice (Vandanmagsar et al. 25 2011) and provides evidence that BGE-102 has the potential to address the key driver of DME that current intravitreal therapies do not. Phase 1b/2a proof-of-concept trial in DME We plan to initiate a Phase 1b/2a proof-of-concept trial of BGE-102 in patients with DME in mid-2026. The trial is designed to demonstrate pharmacodynamic activity of BGE-102 in the eye following oral administration and to evaluate its potential as an adjunctive therapy to anti-VEGF treatment and as a monotherapy. The trial will be a randomized study with an 8-week treatment period. The primary endpoint is percent change in intraocular IL-6. We anticipate preliminary results in mid-2027. 26 Geographic atrophy Disease burden and unmet medical need. Geographic atrophy (GA), the advanced dry form of age-related macular degeneration (AMD), affects approximately 1.2 million patients in the United States. GA is characterized by progressive degeneration of the retinal pigment epithelium (RPE) and photoreceptors, resulting in irreversible loss of central vision. The disease progression is severe: approximately 20% of patients become legally blind within one year of diagnosis, significantly limiting independence and quality of life in an aging population. Recent approvals of intravitreal complement inhibitors, including pegcetacoplan (Syfovre) and avacincaptad pegol (Izervay), have provided the first disease-modifying treatments for GA. However, their clinical efficacy is modest, slowing lesion growth by approximately 15% to 20% in treated eyes. Given this limited benefit relative to the burden of frequent intravitreal injections, approximately 90% of GA patients remain untreated. We believe there is substantial unmet need for oral therapies offering improved efficacy, simpler administration, and broader mechanistic activity. NLRP3 inflammasome in GA. In GA, progressive accumulation of cellular debris (e.g. drusen, lipofuscin), along with Alu RNA, activates NLRP3 in RPE cells and resident microglia. Chronic inflammasome activation and resulting pyroptosis contribute to progressive RPE degeneration and secondary photoreceptor loss. Systemic inflammation is increasingly recognized as a risk factor for GA progression: elevated circulating inflammatory markers, including hsCRP and IL-6, have been associated with increased risk of AMD progression in epidemiological studies. As a result, systemic NLRP3 inhibition may offer advantages over regional intravitreal approaches. Emerging clinical and preclinical evidence. Published preclinical studies support the relevance of NLRP3 to GA. In third-party studies, Nlrp3-knockout mice were completely protected against RPE degeneration induced by both drusen-associated pathogenic stimuli (amyloid-β oligomers) and endosomal damage caused by Alu RNA. 27 Adapted from Narendran et al. 2021 and Tarallo et al. 2012 In a natural aging model of AMD, oral administration of a BGE-102 analog almost completely prevented age-related lipofuscin accumulation, a cardinal feature of GA progression. These findings support the therapeutic hypothesis that NLRP3 inhibition may slow or arrest GA progression. Clinical evidence further supports inflammasome inhibition in GA. A third-party clinical study of an inflammasome inhibitor (K8, an intravitreal implant, N=10) demonstrated a 53% reduction in GA lesion growth at three months (p=0.03 compared to fellow eye), substantially exceeding the approximately 15% reduction observed with approved complement inhibitors at 12 months. In a supporting epidemiological analysis, chronic exposure to fluoxetine, a compound with weak NLRP3 inhibitory activity at micromolar concentrations, was associated with a 22% reduction in incident AMD (hazard ratio 0.778, p<0.001). While these epidemiological data are exploratory, this observation is consistent with the hypothesis that NLRP3 inhibition may slow progression of AMD/GA. 28 Right panel adapted from Ambati et al. 2021 Apelin Receptor APJ Agonists: An Exercise Mimetic Approach for the Treatment of Obesity and Metabolic Disease We are developing novel, potent agonists of the apelin receptor APJ, including both oral small-molecule and parenteral programs. Apelin is a molecule that is secreted in response to exercise, and activation of the apelin pathway has been shown to recapitulate many of the benefits of exercise. We have previously shown that the agonism of the apelin receptor APJ has the potential to double weight loss and fully restore body composition on a GLP-1R agonist background in preclinical models of obesity. We believe the combination of an APJ agonist and an incretin is a pharmacological parallel to diet and exercise: one mechanism relies largely on reducing energy intake, the other on increasing energy expenditure. Levels of the exercise-secreted protein apelin predicted both function and metabolic health in our longitudinal human aging cohorts. The aging process is characterized by profound dysregulation in many biological systems. Examining protein changes over decades in our longitudinal human aging cohorts, we observed that higher levels of circulating apelin were associated with both increased longevity and preservation of physical function (i.e., subjects with higher apelin levels lived longer, with improved health). We also observed that apelin levels are significantly associated with a range of metabolic traits in our human aging cohorts. These results led us to the therapeutic hypothesis that augmenting apelin signaling could provide therapeutic benefits in age-related disease. 29 Higher apelin protein levels predicted improved longevity and grip strength in our human aging cohorts (left). Levels were also associated with traits related to muscle function, adiposity, glucose control, and longevity (right). Glucose and insulin control measure the ability to regulate blood glucose increases via insulin secretion after a glucose challenge. Enhancing apelin signaling can recapitulate many of the benefits of exercise Apelin is a peptide hormone referred to as an exerkine, a signaling molecule released by skeletal muscle in response to exercise that mediates beneficial metabolic and functional adaptations to physical activity. Comparing the physiological effects of enhanced apelin signaling to those of exercise reveals multiple areas of overlap: • Both apelin and exercise have a beneficial effect on body composition, improving the ratio of lean to fat mass. The proportion of lean mass is a very strong predictor of functional capacity, metabolic health, and cardiovascular outcomes (and more predictive than absolute lean mass or absolute fat mass). • In skeletal muscle, both apelin signaling and exercise boost protein synthesis, mitochondrial biogenesis and basal metabolic rate, thereby increasing resting energy expenditure. • In both muscle and adipose tissue, apelin and exercise increase insulin sensitivity, resulting in upregulation of glucose uptake and metabolism. This striking congruence between the actions of apelin and exercise suggests that this peptide acts as a key molecular transducer of the systemic exercise response, and that targeting the apelin/APJ axis may be able to mimic many of the benefits of physical activity sometimes referred to as “exercise in a pill.” 30 Exercise ameliorates many of the negative health outcomes associated with aging. Circulating apelin levels increase acutely after exercise, with the magnitude of this response strongly predicting physical performance in older adults. In a third-party preclinical study, apelin levels were significantly correlated with the benefits of exercise over 6 months. Older people (> 70y) with the greatest increase in plasma apelin levels after 6 months of an exercise program had the highest improvement in Short Physical Performance Battery (SPPB) test score. Apelin measurements were taken from 34 individuals. r 2 represents the correlation coefficient, a statistical measure of the strength of a linear relationship between two variables. A correlation coefficient of -1 describes a perfect negative, or inverse, correlation. A coefficient of 1 shows a perfect positive correlation, or a direct relationship. A correlation coefficient of 0 means there is no linear relationship. The p-value is used to determine the probability as to whether the difference between two data sets is due to chance. The smaller the p-value, the more likely the differences are not due to chance alone. In general, if the p-value is less than or equal to 0.05, the outcome is considered statistically significant. (Source: Vinel et al. 2018). 31 However, both basal levels of apelin and the degree of exercise-induced elevation of the peptide decline with age, coinciding with deterioration of fitness and muscle function. In a third-party preclinical study, apelin expression in mice significantly decreased with age (n= 6 mice per group). There was also a lower magnitude increase in apelin expression in response to exercise with age, with no significant increase observed in the 24 month group. In mice, 12 months represents middle age and 24 months old age. #p< 0.05; *p< 0.05; ** p< 0.01. (Source: Vinel et al. 2018). The relationship between apelin, exercise and function over the lifespan, taken together with the correlation between apelin levels and muscle-related health parameters observed in our longitudinal cohorts, suggest that apelin may help mediate the beneficial anti-aging effects of exercise. 32 Apelin activates key metabolic regulators AMPK, PI3K, and ERK The molecular mechanisms of apelin pathway signaling are well characterized. As depicted in the figure below, the physiological effects of apelin in target cells are mediated by the apelin receptor (APJ/APLNR), a G protein-coupled receptor that activates multiple intracellular signaling pathways including AMP-activated protein kinase (AMPK) and PI3K. In parallel, via recruitment of ß-arrestin upon apelin binding, APJ activates extracellular signal regulated kinase (ERK). These pathways are involved in metabolic processes consistent with apelin’s role as an exerkine, including glucose uptake, mitochondrial biogenesis, and fatty acid oxidation. APJ is a G protein-coupled receptor that signals through AMPK and PI3K. AMPK and PI3K activate downstream effectors Akt and endothelial nitric oxide synthase (eNOS), which increase cellular glucose uptake. AMPK activates transcriptional coactivator PGC-1a, which increases mitochondrial biogenesis. AMPK directly increases fatty acid oxidation. APJ also activates ERK signaling through ß-arrestin. (Source: Bertrand et al. 2015). 33 Genetic evidence supports the potential of APJ agonists to improve metabolism Genetic studies of apelin in mice published by other groups provide support for the potential role of APJ agonists in the treatment of obesity. Inactivation of the gene for apelin was shown to result in mice with a statistically significant increase in fat content compared to similarly treated wild-type mice. Apelin knockout mice fed a high fat diet for three weeks also had significantly decreased insulin sensitivity compared to similarly treated wild-type mice. In a third-party preclinical study, inactivation of the gene for apelin (APKO) in mice led to a significant increase in fat content compared to wild-type counterparts (p<0.05) (n =10–15 mice per group). In a separate third-party preclinical study, APKO mice had significantly worse performance on an insulin tolerance test (p<0.01) (n= 6 –7 mice per group). (Source: Yue et al. 2010, Yue et al. 2011). In contrast, transgenic mice with overexpressed apelin showed several metabolic benefits. Animals were significantly protected from weight gain when placed on a high fat diet. This was not due to a decrease in food intake, but instead to an increased metabolic rate. Consistent with apelin’s role as an exerkine, transgenic apelin mice also had increased skeletal muscle mitochondrial biogenesis and increased oxygen intake compared to wild-type counterparts. In a third-party preclinical study, overexpression of apelin in a transgenic mouse (Tg) resulted in significantly reduced weight when fed a high fat diet compared to wild-type control mice (Cont) (p<0.001) (n= 19–24 mice per group). Tg mice had a significantly higher basal metabolic rate than their wild-type counterparts on a high fat diet (p<0.01) (n= 7-9 mice per group) with no significant difference in food intake (n= 19–24 mice per group). (Source: Yamamoto et al. 2011). 34 Human genetics are consistent with findings in interventional genetic studies in mice. Significant genome-wide associations have been reported at the apelin receptor, APJ, and body mass index, lean body mass and serum lipid levels across diverse populations. Preclinical results in a diet-induced obesity mouse model demonstrate the potential of apelin receptor APJ agonists to increase weight loss quantity and quality We evaluated the effects of an investigational oral small molecule APJ agonist, azelaprag, on weight loss and other outcomes in a diet-induced obesity mouse model. Azelaprag, in combination with tirzepatide, restored body weight and body composition of obese mice to lean control levels. Tirzepatide monotherapy led to a reduction in body weight of approximately 15% at the dose tested. The addition of azelaprag to tirzepatide treatment led to further significant, dose-dependent decreases in body weight, with 40% weight reduction by three weeks in the highest dose group. In addition to correcting total weight back to lean control levels, the addition of azelaprag in combination with tirzepatide also restored the body composition of obese mice to that of lean controls in a significant, dose-dependent fashion. The proportion of lean body mass increased while that of fat decreased over the three-week dosing period. 35 In the context of clinical care, body composition — and specifically the proportion of lean mass — is highly predictive of multiple health outcomes including physical function, metabolic health and cardiovascular outcomes (and more predictive than absolute levels of lean or fat mass). The combination of azelaprag and tirzepatide resulted in significant, dose-dependent increases in overall weight loss compared to tirzepatide monotherapy in diet-induced obesity mouse model (left), as well as full restoration of body composition (% lean, % fat, lean / fat ratio) of obese mice to that of lean controls (middle, right). Lean and fat mass were measured by EchoMRI. Group size: n=6-14 per group. Tirzepatide (10nmol/kg) vs. tirzepatide (10nmol/kg) + azelaprag (1.1g/l) on day 20: p<0.0001 for all measurements. Clinical Case Study: azelaprag results demonstrate the potential of apelin receptor APJ agonists to function as an exerkine mimetic to improve body composition and metabolism We completed a double-blind, non-randomized Phase 1b bed rest atrophy trial of apelin receptor APJ agonist, azelaprag, in 21 healthy individuals 65 years of age or older. Bed rest studies are a well-established method to model muscle and functional aging on a compressed timeline. In the trial, subjects on bed rest for 10 days received daily doses of 240 mg azelaprag or placebo delivered by intravenous infusion. We observed that treatment with azelaprag significantly decreased (p<0.05) bed-rest-induced muscle atrophy across multiple endpoints as shown in the figure below. Overview endpoints and significance of results from the azelaprag bed rest atrophy Phase 1b trial. Thigh circumference results are shown as an example at right: 10 days of bed rest led to a mean decrease of 6.4% in thigh circumference in subjects that received placebo. By contrast, we observed no significant decrease in thigh circumference in subjects dosed with azelaprag. 36 In January 2025, we terminated development of azelaprag, an orally available small molecule agonist of APJ, for obesity and other chronic diseases. The decision followed observations of liver transaminitis without clinically significant symptoms, and without clear dose dependence, in some patients in the azelaprag arms of the STRIDES Phase 2 clinical trial for obesity. However, we believe the results of the azelaprag Phase 1 trials demonstrate the potential of apelin receptor APJ agonists; therefore, we are advancing distinct, orally available apelin receptor APJ agonists as a novel exercise mimetic approach for the treatment of obesity. Development strategy and timelines We are advancing APJ agonists through both oral and parenteral development pathways to maximize the potential of this therapeutic approach across different clinical contexts and patient populations. Oral APJ agonist program. We have filed composition of matter intellectual property protecting novel small molecule APJ agonists with picomolar potency. These compounds are based on an innovative chemical scaffold and achieve agonist potency comparable to native apelin-13, the endogenous ligand. We intend to characterize these compounds further and advance the most promising candidate toward IND-enabling studies. Parenteral APJ agonist program. In June 2025, we announced an option agreement with JiKang Therapeutics for a novel APJ agonist nanobody — a single-domain antibody derived from camelid immunoglobulin. The nanobody demonstrates approximately 10-fold greater agonist potency than native apelin and is optimized for subcutaneous administration, providing a longer-acting modality suitable for chronic obesity treatment. We are conducting preclinical characterization and advancing this program toward IND-enabling studies. We intend to file the first IND for an APJ program by the end of 2026. The evolving obesity treatment landscape Obesity disease overview: a growing driver of both morbidity and healthcare spending Obesity is a complex medical disorder that has been described as an accelerated aging condition, as it increases the risk of both morbidity and mortality from age-related chronic disease. It involves both appetite dysregulation and altered lipid and energy metabolism, which in turn result in excessive accumulation of fat tissue. Globally, over 875 million adults age 20+ are living with obesity, defined as a body mass index (BMI) of 30 or greater. Furthermore, the worldwide prevalence of obesity in 37 adults 20+ more than doubled from under 7% in 1990 to over 16% in 2022. The global estimated cost of overweight and obesity is in the trillions of dollars, representing more than 2% of the global gross domestic product. Obesity is associated with over 200 health comorbidities and complications, including many cardiometabolic disorders. Among obese patients, the prevalence of these conditions is high: 19-23% have type 2 diabetes, dyslipidemia (66-70%), hypertension (51-61%), metabolic dysfunction-associated steatohepatitis (30-36%), and heart disease (3-5% congestive heart failure, 8% ischemic heart disease, 21% myocardial infarction). Obesity is also associated with an increased risk of developing infertility and certain cancers. Weight loss leads to improvements across many comorbidities associated with obesity. Obesity treatment landscape: incretin drugs are transforming care, creating an important clinical and commercial opportunity The treatment landscape for obesity has undergone a fundamental transformation with the emergence of GLP-1R agonists. Injectable GLP-1R agonists, including semaglutide (Wegovy) and tirzepatide (Zepbound), have demonstrated unprecedented efficacy in achieving sustained weight loss and improving cardiometabolic risk factors. In pivotal clinical trials, injectable semaglutide produced approximately 15% weight loss; tirzepatide, a dual GLP-1R/GIP receptor agonist, produced approximately 21% weight loss. The commercial success of injectable GLP-1R agonists has been significant. The global market for GLP-1R agonists is projected to exceed $150 billion by 2031, driven by expanding indications beyond obesity and diabetes, new oral and combination formulations, and increasing treatment penetration across broader patient populations. The scale of this market reflects both the severity of the underlying unmet need and the magnitude of the commercial opportunity for therapies that can 38 address the limitations of current incretin-based approaches — limitations that we believe APJ agonism is well positioned to complement. Key unmet needs Despite the advances represented by GLP-1R agonist therapy, substantial unmet medical needs persist in obesity treatment. These unmet needs span three critical dimensions: oral efficacy parity with injectables, gastrointestinal tolerability, and preservation of body composition during weight loss. Current therapeutic approaches address only a subset of these needs, leaving significant therapeutic gaps. 39 Oral weight loss. Oral GLP-1R agonist programs have generally underperformed relative to injectable formulations. Oral approaches employing permeation enhancers and structural modifications have achieved weight loss in the range of 7% to 12%, substantially lower than the 15% to 24% weight loss achieved by injectable GLP-1R agonists and triple agonists. This efficacy gap — representing approximately a 50% reduction in weight loss from injectable to oral formulation — limits the clinical utility of oral approaches as monotherapy and reflects fundamental challenges in achieving adequate intestinal permeability and systemic bioavailability of peptide-based GLP-1R agonists via the oral route. Tolerability . Gastrointestinal side effects represent a substantial barrier to tolerability and adherence with incretin-based obesity therapeutics. In Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials, gastrointestinal adverse events — including nausea, vomiting, constipation, and diarrhea — occur in 31% to 44% of patients treated with injectable incretin agonists and in 58% to 87% of patients treated with oral incretin programs. These side effects are dose-dependent and frequently motivate dose reductions or treatment discontinuation. In controlled clinical trials, discontinuation due to adverse events reaches approximately 17%, and real-world discontinuation rates are substantially higher, with some analyses indicating discontinuation in up to 68% of patients. The tolerability barrier thus represents a major impediment to treatment initiation, dose escalation, and treatment persistence in a substantial proportion of patients with obesity. Body composition . A fundamental limitation of current obesity therapeutics, including GLP-1R agonists, is that weight loss achieved through appetite suppression is not accompanied by preferential loss of adipose tissue. Rather, a substantial proportion of weight loss represents loss of lean muscle mass. Clinical data indicate that up to 50% of weight lost during GLP-1R agonist treatment may comprise lean body mass rather than adipose tissue. The loss of lean mass during weight loss carries profound physiological consequences. Lean mass, primarily skeletal muscle, is the principal contributor to basal metabolic rate — the energy expenditure required at rest to maintain basic cellular and organ function. When lean mass is lost disproportionately during weight loss, basal metabolic rate decreases, reducing daily energy expenditure. This metabolic adaptation creates a disadvantage: the patient, now at a lower body weight, has a substantially reduced caloric requirement and is thus more susceptible to weight regain even when consuming the same number of calories that previously maintained the lower weight. Furthermore, loss of lean mass increases frailty risk, impairs physical function, and may accelerate age-related physical decline, particularly in older adults with obesity. A particularly concerning manifestation of lean mass loss during weight loss therapy is increased bone fragility and fracture risk. In the SELECT trial (Semaglutide Effects on Cardiovascular Outcomes in People with Overweight or Obesity), a large randomized controlled trial of semaglutide in patients with obesity and established cardiovascular disease, an approximately 5-fold increase in hip and pelvis fractures was observed in female participants treated with semaglutide compared to placebo, a finding that has prompted re-evaluation of the benefit-risk profile in populations at elevated baseline fracture risk. APJ agonism in obesity The combination of APJ agonism with GLP-1R/GIP agonists represents a therapeutically rational approach based on complementary mechanisms of action — appetite suppression plus energy expenditure enhancement — and supported by preclinical evidence of additive effects on body weight and composition. We believe this combination approach may address multiple unmet needs simultaneously: the dual oral and parenteral portfolio provides formulation flexibility, the complementary mechanism may reduce reliance on maximal doses of appetite-suppressing agents with associated GI side effects, and the energy expenditure and lean mass preservation properties may improve body composition outcomes. Our Platform for Discovery of Novel Targets that Drive Human Metabolic Aging We have built a target discovery capability specifically designed to identify and validate drug targets that drive metabolic aging and age-related diseases in humans. Our approach combines: • Long-term longitudinal cohorts of naturally aging individuals. We have generated proprietary datasets based on serial biological samples from cohort studies that satisfy a set of unusual and valuable requirements for the study of aging biology: (1) being composed of healthy aging adults originally recruited decades in the past, (2) having followed subject outcomes and collected deep healthspan data continuously to the present day, and (3) having collected longitudinal biosamples that have also been maintained to the present day. • Serial multi-omic molecular profiling. Through partnerships with companies using state-of-the-art molecular profiling techniques, we quantified thousands of components from these samples, such as proteins and metabolites, with high sensitivity. 40 • Data science analysis. We have developed a suite of analytic approaches allowing us to integrate longitudinal molecular profiles with clinical and health outcome data to directly decode the biology that drives disparate aging trajectories and metabolic aging and related health outcomes and identify novel drug targets for treating metabolic disease. • Expertise in aging biology. We apply our knowledge of the aging process, including our own large colony of naturally aged rodents, to validate potential drug targets in relevant in vitro and in vivo models of age-related metabolic disorders. • Technology-forward approach to clinical trials. We aim to maximize the value of our clinical trials by leveraging advanced analytic approaches to quantify participants’ biology and health, derive mechanistic insights, and link trial observations back to long-term healthspan outcomes from our natural aging cohorts. Examples from prior and ongoing trials include plasma proteomic profiling, wearable devices, protein synthetic rate analysis, and single-nucleus RNA sequencing of biopsy samples. The BioAge platform encompasses over 150 million molecular data points spanning over 25 thousand individual participant profiles and over 50 years of follow-up. Approach for identifying novel targets based on unique insights into human aging biology We have negotiated favorable agreements with biobanks to access long-term longitudinal cohorts of individuals with serially biobanked samples who were enrolled as healthy adults and followed for up to 50 years. In these cohorts, we have detailed medical outcomes and physiological measurements systematically collected over the course of these studies, including lifespan outcomes, such as all-cause and disease-specific mortality; functional healthspan outcomes such as grip strength and walking speed; and disease outcomes such as cognitive scores and dementia diagnoses, cardiovascular disease progression, BMI and skinfold thickness. 41 The biobanks to which we have secured access are from distinct geographical regions and include samples from individuals whose demographics are representative of those regions, enabling us to identify aging processes that are conserved across populations and environmental backgrounds. Example of longitudinal lifespan and health outcomes captured in human aging cohorts. CVD: Cardiovascular. ApoE: Apolipoprotein E. We partner with organizations and companies leading the development of highly sensitive multi-omic molecular profiling technologies, including SomaLogic and Metabolon, to identify and quantify components of longitudinally biobanked serum and plasma specimens from our aging cohorts. The capabilities that these organizations and companies bring allow us to generate molecular profiles with more detail than had previously been possible. We combine proteomics and metabolomics with orthogonal data such as clinical outcomes and healthspan phenotypes to obtain insights into the underlying pathways and potential targets that predispose individuals to age more quickly or be more resistant to developing multi-morbidity. Our goal as a company is to use these insights to develop pharmaceuticals that can treat a range of metabolic diseases driven by aging. 42 We have previously shared the identification of apelin and NLRP3 from our platform. Beyond these targets, there are many promising targets emerging from our data sets. The figure below highlights the many proteins that have significant signals for both longevity as well as multiple health outcomes in our cohort data. Circulating proteins are shown based on their magnitude of association with mortality (hazard ratio) in the BioAge human aging cohorts. Proteins are color coded based on significant associations (p<0.05) with future healthspan outcomes representing different organ systems, including grip strength (muscle aging), cognitive scores (brain aging), renal function quantified with cystatin C (kidney aging), and cardiovascular aging. A protein was considered significant for cardiovascular aging if significantly associated with ≥ 2+ of the following risk factors: total cholesterol, HDL, LDL, systolic or diastolic BP, fasting glucose, CRP, MCP-1 and ICAM-1. Our Longevity Map (as defined below) is the result of applying an aging-biology-focused analytic approach that integrates proprietary data originating from our human aging cohorts with public data on aging and target biology to generate powerful insights into human aging mechanisms and targets. Our core analytical pipeline leverages (among other approaches): • longitudinal multi-omic and clinical data, • relationships across multiple datasets and data modalities, • network based propagation of biological signals, and 43 • causal evidence from genetic signals via a bespoke mendelian randomization analysis. The BioAge Longevity Map integrates novel aging biology and public data to derive insights into aging biology and resulting therapeutic targets. We are advancing several additional platform targets, currently in molecule discovery stage in collaboration with Lilly, which we believe have the potential to transform treatment of metabolic disease. We plan to expand this pipeline over time, both internally and through the target discovery collaboration with Novartis, and potentially through additional partnerships with pharmaceutical companies. Manufacturing We oversee and manage contract development and manufacturing organizations (CDMOs) to support development and manufacture of product candidates for our clinical trials. We expect our strategy to use CDMOs will enable us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure, avoiding the necessity to acquire our own manufacturing facility and equipment, while simultaneously enabling us to focus our expertise on the clinical development and the potential future commercialization of our products. Currently, we rely on and have agreements with multiple third-party CDMOs to manufacture and supply active pharmaceutical ingredients (APIs) and drug products (DPs) for our clinical trials. To prepare for advancement of our drug candidates to Phase 3 clinical trials, we anticipate the need to enter into a manufacture and supply agreement with, and transfer API and DP manufacture to, one or more additional third-party CDMOs with whom we would also likely enter into commercial supply agreements prior to any potential regulatory approval if any of our drug candidates are commercialized. The DP for our drug candidates is manufactured via conventional pharmaceutical processing procedures, employing commonly used and commercially available excipients and packaging materials. The procedure and equipment employed for manufacture and analysis are consistent with standard organic synthesis or pharmaceutical production, and are transferable to a range of manufacturing facilities, if needed. Competition The biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapid evolution of technologies, fierce competition and strong defense of intellectual property. While we believe that our platform, knowledge, experience and scientific resources provide us with competitive advantages, we face competition from major pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and public and private research institutions, among others. 44 If any of our product candidates are approved for the indications for which we expect to conduct clinical trials, they will compete with existing therapies and currently marketed drugs, as well as any drug products currently or in the future in development that are ultimately approved, that are potential treatments for metabolic diseases, such as obesity. It is also possible that we will face competition from other pharmaceutical approaches as well as other types of therapies. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all our programs, if approved, are likely to be their efficacy, safety, convenience, price, level of generic competition, and availability of reimbursement. Many of our current or potential competitors, either alone or with their collaboration partners, have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved products than we do. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and patient registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. Mergers and acquisitions in the biopharmaceutical industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. With respect to BGE-102, direct competition is currently limited as there are no approved NLRP3 inhibitors or other inflammasome-targeted therapeutics. However, we are aware of NLRP3 inhibitor pipeline programs including those from Ventyx Biosciences (pending acquisition by Eli Lilly), NodThera, Roche, Merck, Novo Nordisk, AstraZeneca, Neumora, Ventus, Tenvie, Insilico, Brenig, and Zydus. Our competitors for the apelin receptor APJ agonist program include Structure Therapeutics, Bristol Myers Squibb, APIE Therapeutics and Sanofi, S.A. who have or had small molecule APJ agonists in preclinical or clinical development. We anticipate that we will continue to face increasing competition as new therapies and combinations thereof, and related data emerge. Competitors, independently or through collaboration, are developing products that potentially directly compete with our current or future product candidates and which may (i) be a longer lasting or a more efficacious treatment, or better tolerated or (ii) receive FDA or other applicable regulatory approval more rapidly than our current or future product candidates. Our commercial opportunity could be reduced or eliminated if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer, more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or other applicable regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we are able to enter the market. Intellectual Property Intellectual property is of vital importance in our field and in biotechnology generally. We seek to protect and enhance proprietary technology, inventions, and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business by seeking, maintaining and defending patent rights, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. We will also seek to rely on regulatory protection afforded through inclusion in expedited development and review, data exclusivity, market exclusivity and patent term extensions where available. We have sought patent protection in the United States and internationally related to our novel drugs, including compositions of matter directed both specifically and generically to our leads and backup compounds and corresponding methods of use directed to various clinical indications of the same, and other inventions and improvements that are central to our research and development efforts. In addition, we intend to seek additional patent protection which may enhance commercial success to the extent warranted by future developments. As of February 20, 2026, our intellectual property portfolio contained owned and in-licensed cases and contains several issued U.S. and foreign national patents, and multiple pending U.S., Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT) and foreign national applications. These patent families are expected to expire between 2032 and 2046, excluding patent term adjustments, extensions or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. APJ Agonist Program As of February 20, 2026, we owned one patent family relating to novel apelin receptor APJ agonists and related methods. This patent family includes three U.S. provisional applications having filing dates of May 27, 2025; September 17, 2025; and January 7, 2026. Any patents that may issue and claim priority to the pending applications are expected to expire in 2046, without taking into account any patent term adjustments, extensions or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. 45 As of February 20, 2026, we had optioned to license one patent family from JiKang Therapeutics relating to a novel APJ agonist antibody. This patent family includes one PCT non-provisional application, and any patents that may issue and claim priority to the pending application are expected to expire in 2046, without taking into account any patent term adjustments, extensions or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. As of February 20, 2026, we had in-licensed one patent family from INSERM relating to use of the class of apelin receptor agonists for treating sarcopenia. This patent family includes one U.S. Patent, and foreign national patents in Japan and Europe (with validation in 5 European states), which patents are expected to expire in 2032, without taking into account any patent term adjustments, or extensions, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. As of February 20, 2026, we owned six patent families relating to methods of using APJ agonists, including therapeutic uses for frailty, muscle atrophy, or obesity. These patent families include six pending U.S. and PCT non-provisional applications, and 34 pending foreign national applications, including applications in Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Europe, Israel, Japan, Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, Singapore and Taiwan. Any patents that may issue from our pending patent applications or claim priority to pending provisional applications are expected to expire between 2042 and 2045, without taking into account any patent term adjustments, extensions or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. NLRP3 Inhibitor Program As of February 20, 2026, we owned eleven patent families relating to novel NLRP3 (nucleotide binding oligomerization domain-like receptor family pyrin domain-containing 3) inhibitors and related methods. One of these patent families is co-owned with HitGen, Inc. The eleven patent families include eight issued U.S. patents (one co-owned with HitGen that is under our exclusive control, and seven solely-owned by BioAge), five pending U.S. provisional applications, nine pending U.S. and PCT non-provisional applications, and 40 pending foreign national applications, including applications in Argentina, Australia, Canada, China, Europe, Eurasia, Japan, Korea and Taiwan. Patent term is based on the effective filing date of each family. Of the eight issued patents, five will expire on March 23, 2042, two will expire on January 27, 2043, and one will expire on March 25, 2045, without taking into account any patent term adjustments, extensions or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. Future patents that result from pending applications in these families are projected to expire on one of March 23, 2042; January 27, 2043; September 19, 2043; September 11, 2044; October 4, 2044; or March 25, 2045, without taking into account any patent term adjustments, extensions, or terminal disclaimers, and assuming payment of all appropriate maintenance fees. Platform Technology and Discovery Program As of February 20, 2026, we owned 3 patent families relating to platform technology for identifying pathways for healthy aging and druggable targets, and 1 patent family relating to a class of therapeutic fusion proteins that bind endogenous RAGE ligands. These patent families include 4 issued U. S. patents, one issued Japanese patent, 3 pending U.S. applications, and 3 pending foreign national applications, including applications in Canada, and Europe. U.S. Patent No. 11,881,311 expires September 23, 2041, inclusive of patent term adjustment, and without taking into account any potential future extension. U.S. Patent No. 11,445,981 expires August 11, 2039, inclusive of patent term adjustment, and without taking into account any potential future extension. U.S. Patent No. 10,913,784 expires September 13, 2039, without taking into account any potential future extension. U.S. Patent No. 11,535,661, expires September 13, 2039, inclusive of a terminal disclaimer, and without taking into account any potential future extension. Japanese Patent No. 7,307,178 expires in September 2039, without taking into account any potential future extension. The 3 pending U.S. applications are expected to expire respectively in February 2038, July 2038, and October 2038, without taking into account any potential patent term adjustment, terminal disclaimer, or future extension. The 3 pending foreign national applications are expected to expire in October 2038 or September 2039, without taking into account any potential future supplementary protection certificate or extension. We expect to file additional patent applications in support of current and future clinical candidates as well as new platform and core technologies. Our commercial success will depend in part on obtaining and maintaining patent protection on our current and future product candidates and their related methods of use, as well as successfully defending any such patents against third-party challenges and operating without infringing on the proprietary rights of others. Our ability to stop third parties from making, using, selling, offering to sell or importing our product candidates will depend, in part, on the extent to which we have rights under valid and enforceable patents that cover these activities. We cannot be sure that patents will be granted with respect to any of our pending patent applications or with respect to any patent applications filed by us in the future, nor can we be sure 46 that any patents that may be granted to us in the future will be commercially useful in protecting our product candidates, discovery programs and processes. For this and more comprehensive risks related to intellectual property, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Intellectual Property.” The terms of individual patents depend upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we file, including the United States, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application. In the United States, a patent’s term may be lengthened by patent term adjustment, which compensates a patentee for administrative delays by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) in examining and granting a patent, or may be shortened if a patent is terminally disclaimed over an earlier filed patent. In the United States, the term of a patent that covers a drug approved by the FDA may also be eligible for extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the subject drug candidate is under regulatory review. Patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval, only one patent applicable to an approved drug may be extended and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it, or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Similar provisions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug are available in Europe and other foreign jurisdictions. In the future, if and when our products receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering those products. We plan to seek patent term extensions to any issued patents we may obtain in any jurisdiction where such patent term extensions are available, however there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA in the United States, will agree with our assessment that such extensions should be granted, and if granted, the length of such extensions. For more information regarding the risks related to intellectual property, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Intellectual Property.” In most instances, we have submitted and expect to submit patent applications directly to the USPTO as provisional patent applications. Corresponding non-provisional patent applications must be filed not later than 12 months after the provisional application filing date. While we intend to timely file non-provisional patent applications relating to our provisional patent applications, we cannot predict whether any such patent applications will result in the issuance of patents that provide us with any competitive advantage. We file U.S. non-provisional applications, PCT applications and non-PCT foreign national applications that claim the benefit of the priority date of earlier filed provisional applications, when applicable. The PCT system allows a single application to be filed within 12 months of the original priority date of the patent application, and to designate all of the PCT member states in which national patent applications can later be pursued based on the international patent application filed under the PCT. The PCT searching authority performs a patentability search and issues a non-binding patentability opinion which can be used to evaluate the chances of success for the national applications in foreign countries prior to having to incur the filing fees. Although a PCT application does not issue as a patent, it allows the applicant to seek protection in any of the member states through national-phase applications. Before the end of the period of approximately two and a half years from the first priority date of the patent application, separate patent applications can be pursued in any of the PCT member states either by direct national filing or, in some cases, by filing through a regional patent organization, such as the European Patent Office. The PCT system delays expenses, allows a limited evaluation of the chances of success for national/regional patent applications, and enables substantial savings where applications are abandoned within the first two and a half years of filing. For all patent applications, we determine claiming strategy on a case-by-case basis. Advice of counsel and our business model and needs are always considered. We seek to file patents containing claims for protection of all useful applications of our proprietary technologies and any products, as well as all new applications and/or uses we discover for existing technologies and products, assuming these are strategically valuable. We continuously reassess the number and type of patent applications, as well as the pending and issued patent claims to pursue maximum coverage and value for our processes, and compositions, given existing patent office rules and regulations. Further, claims may be modified during patent prosecution to meet our intellectual property and business needs. 47 We recognize that the ability to obtain patent protection and the degree of such protection depends on a number of factors, including the extent of the prior art, the novelty and non-obviousness of the invention, and the ability to satisfy the enablement requirement of the patent laws. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted or further altered even after patent issuance. Consequently, we may not obtain or maintain adequate patent protection for any of our future product candidates or for our technology platform. We cannot predict whether the patent applications we are currently pursuing will issue as patents in any particular jurisdiction or whether the claims of any issued patents will provide sufficient proprietary protection from competitors. Any patents that we hold may be challenged, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. In addition to patent protection, we also rely on trademark registration, trade secrets, know how, other proprietary information and continuing technological innovation to develop and maintain our competitive position. We seek to protect and maintain the confidentiality of proprietary information to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets or disclose our technology. Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific collaborators, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information concerning our business or financial affairs developed or made known to the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. Our agreements with employees also provide that all inventions conceived by the employee in the course of employment with us or from the employee’s use of our confidential information are our exclusive property. However, such confidentiality agreements and invention assignment agreements can be breached and we may not have adequate remedies for any such breach. In addition, our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that our consultants, contractors or collaborators use intellectual property owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting trade secrets, know-how and inventions. For more information regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Intellectual Property.” The patent positions of biotechnology companies like ours are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. Our commercial success will also depend in part on not infringing upon the proprietary rights of third parties. Third-party patents could require us to alter our development or commercial strategies, or our products or processes, obtain licenses or cease certain activities. Our breach of any license agreements or our failure to obtain a license to proprietary rights required to develop or commercialize our future products may have a material adverse impact on us. If third parties prepare and file patent applications in the United States that also claim technology to which we have rights, we may have to participate in interference or derivation proceedings in the USPTO to determine priority, or rights in, an invention. For more information, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Intellectual Property.” When available to expand market exclusivity, our strategy is to obtain or license additional intellectual property related to current or contemplated development platforms, core elements of technology and/or clinical candidates. Government Regulation Pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by government authorities in the United States, at the federal, state and local level, and in other countries and jurisdictions. The processes for obtaining regulatory approvals in the United States and in foreign countries and jurisdictions, along with subsequent compliance with applicable statutes and regulations and other regulatory authorities, require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. FDA Review and Approval Process In the United States, pharmaceutical products are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (the FD&C Act) and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, storage, recordkeeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as a clinical hold, FDA refusal to approve pending new drug applications (NDAs), warning or untitled letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties and criminal prosecution. 48 Pharmaceutical product development for a new product or certain changes to an approved product in the U.S. typically involves preclinical laboratory and animal tests, the submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application (IND), which must become effective before clinical testing may commence, and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the drug for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease. Preclinical tests include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry, formulation and toxicity, as well as animal studies to assess the characteristics and potential safety and efficacy of the product, as well as in some cases to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of the preclinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements, including good laboratory practices for safety/toxicology studies. The results of preclinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long-term preclinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective and the proposed clinical trial may commence 30 days after receipt of the IND by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor must resolve the issues to the FDA’s satisfaction before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence. Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational new drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted: (i) in compliance with federal regulations; (ii) in compliance with good clinical practices (GCP), an international standard meant to protect the rights and health of participants and to define the roles of clinical trial sponsors, administrators and monitors; as well as (iii) under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. While the IND is active, progress reports summarizing the results, if known, of the clinical trials and preclinical studies performed since the last progress report, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA, and written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and investigators in certain circumstances. The FDA may order the temporary, or permanent, discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time, or impose other sanctions, if it believes that the clinical trial either is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial participants. The study protocol and informed consent information for participants in clinical trials must also be submitted to an institutional review board (IRB) or ethics committee at each clinical site for approval before each trial begins. An IRB monitors clinical trials through to completion and may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions. Clinical trials to support NDAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, but the phases may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the drug into healthy human subjects or patients, the drug is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, early evidence of effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population to determine the effectiveness of the drug for a particular indication, dosage tolerance and optimum dosage, and to identify common adverse effects and safety risks. If a drug demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 trials are undertaken to obtain the additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the drug and to provide adequate information for the labeling of the drug. In many cases, particularly for prevalent diseases, the FDA requires two adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 clinical trials to demonstrate the efficacy of the drug. A single adequate and well-controlled Phase 3 trial in conjunction with confirmatory evidence may be sufficient in many other instances, particularly for rare disease therapies. A single adequate and well-controlled trial may also be sufficient, though it is less common, when the trial is a large multicenter trial demonstrating internal consistency and a statistically very persuasive finding of a clinically meaningful effect on mortality, irreversible morbidity or prevention of a disease with a potentially serious outcome and confirmation of the result in a second trial would be practically or ethically impossible. The manufacturer of an investigational new drug in a Phase 2 or 3 clinical trial for a serious or life-threatening disease is required to make available, such as by posting on its website, its policy on evaluating and responding to requests for expanded access. 49 After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the NDA is required before marketing and distribution of the product may begin in the U.S. The NDA must include the results of all preclinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture and controls, as well as any proposed labeling. The cost of preparing and submitting an NDA is substantial and includes an application user fee (unless a waiver applies) as well as an annual program fee, and the fees are typically increased annually. The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA to conduct a preliminary review and determine whether the application will be filed based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. If the FDA determines the application is incomplete because it does not on its face contain required information, the FDA may refuse to file the application and request additional information rather than file the NDA. In this event, the NDA must be resubmitted with the additional information. The resubmitted application is subject to preliminary review before the FDA files it. Once the submission is filed, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of NDAs to encourage timeliness. Applications for new molecular entity (NME) standard review drug products are reviewed within twelve months of the date of submission of the NDA to the FDA; applications for priority review NMEs are reviewed within eight months of the date of submission of the NDA to the FDA. Priority review can be applied to drugs that the FDA determines offer major advances in treatment or provide a treatment where no adequate therapy exists. The review process for both standard and priority review may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider certain late-submitted information, or information intended to clarify information already provided in the submission. The FDA may also refer applications for novel drug products, or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy, to an outside advisory committee—typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts—for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the product unless compliance with current good manufacturing practices (cGMPs) is satisfactory and the NDA contains data that provide substantial evidence that the drug is safe and effective in the indication studied. After the FDA evaluates the NDA and completes any clinical and manufacturing facility inspections, it issues either an approval letter or a complete response letter (CRL). A CRL generally outlines the deficiencies the FDA identified during its review of the submission and may require substantial additional testing, or information, in order for the FDA to reconsider the application for approval. If, or when, those deficiencies have been addressed to the FDA’s satisfaction in a resubmission of the NDA, the FDA will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing and distribution of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of NDA approval, the FDA may require a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (REMS) to help ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh the potential risks. REMS can include medication guides, communication plans for healthcare professionals, and elements to assure safe use (ETASU). ETASU can include, but are not limited to, special training or certification for prescribing or dispensing, dispensing only under certain circumstances, special monitoring and the use of patient registries. The requirement for a REMS can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the drug. Moreover, product approval may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the drug’s safety or efficacy and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of this post-approval testing or surveillance. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained or problems are identified following initial marketing. Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement before the change can be implemented. An NDA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing NDA supplements as it does in reviewing NDAs. 50 Disclosure of Clinical Trial Information Sponsors of clinical trials of FDA regulated products, including drugs, are required to register and disclose certain clinical trial information on ClinicalTrials.gov. Information related to the product, patient population, phase of investigation, study sites and investigators, and other aspects of the clinical trial is then made public as part of the registration. Sponsors are also obligated to disclose the results of their clinical trials after completion. Disclosure of the results of these trials can be delayed in certain circumstances for up to two years after the date of completion of the trial. Competitors may use this publicly available information to gain knowledge regarding the progress of development programs. Pediatric Information Under the Pediatric Research Equity Act (PREA), NDAs or supplements to NDAs must contain data to assess the safety and effectiveness of the drug for the claimed indications in all relevant pediatric subpopulations and to support dosing and administration for each pediatric subpopulation for which the drug is safe and effective. The FD&C Act requires that a sponsor who is planning to submit a marketing application for a product that includes a new active ingredient, new indication, new dosage form, new dosing regimen or new route of administration submit an initial Pediatric Study Plan (PSP), within 60 days of an end-of-Phase 2 meeting or as may be agreed between the sponsor and FDA. The FDA and the sponsor must reach agreement on the PSP. The FDA may grant full or partial waivers, or deferrals, for submission of data. The Best Pharmaceuticals for Children Act (BPCA) provides NDA holders a six-month extension of any exclusivity—patent or nonpatent—for a drug if certain conditions are met. Conditions for exclusivity include the FDA’s determination that information relating to the use of a new drug in the pediatric population may produce health benefits in that population, the FDA making a written request for pediatric studies, and the applicant agreeing to perform, and reporting on, the requested studies within the statutory timeframe. Applications under the BPCA are treated as priority applications, with all of the benefits that designation confers. Post-Approval Requirements Once an NDA is approved, a product will be subject to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of drugs, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. Drugs may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability, including investigation by federal and state authorities. Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports are required following FDA approval of an NDA. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 testing, REMS, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product, or the FDA may place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality control, drug manufacture, packaging and labeling procedures must continue to conform to cGMPs after approval. Drug manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies. Registration with the FDA subjects entities to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, during which the Agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with cGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the areas of production and quality-control to maintain compliance with cGMPs. FDA may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered. The Hatch-Waxman Amendments Orange Book Listing Under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, commonly referred to as the Hatch Waxman Amendments, NDA applicants are required to list with the FDA each patent whose claims cover the applicant’s product or approved method of using the product. Upon approval of a drug, each of the patents listed in the application for the drug is then published in the FDA’s Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations, commonly known as the Orange Book. Drugs listed in the Orange Book can, in turn, be cited by potential generic competitors in support of approval of an abbreviated new drug application (ANDA). An ANDA provides for marketing of a drug product that has the same active 51 ingredients in the same strengths and dosage form as the listed drug and has been shown through bioequivalence testing to be therapeutically equivalent to the listed drug. Other than the requirement for bioequivalence testing, ANDA applicants are not required to conduct, or submit results of, preclinical or clinical tests to prove the safety or effectiveness of their drug product. Drugs approved in this way are commonly referred to as “generic equivalents” to the listed drug and can often be substituted by pharmacists under prescriptions written for the original listed drug. The ANDA applicant is required to certify to the FDA concerning any patents listed for the approved product in the FDA’s Orange Book. Specifically, the applicant must certify that (i) the required patent information has not been filed; (ii) the listed patent has expired; (iii) the listed patent has not expired but will expire on a particular date and approval is sought after patent expiration; or (iv) the listed patent is invalid or will not be infringed by the new product. The ANDA applicant may also elect to submit a Section VIII statement certifying that its proposed ANDA label does not contain (or carve out) any language regarding the patented method-of-use rather than certify to a listed method-of-use patent. If the applicant does not challenge the listed patents, the ANDA application will not be approved until all the listed patents claiming the referenced product have expired. A certification that the new product will not infringe the already approved product’s listed patents, or that such patents are invalid, is called a Paragraph IV certification. If the ANDA applicant has provided a Paragraph IV certification to the FDA, the applicant must also send notice of the Paragraph IV certification to the NDA and patent holders once the ANDA has been accepted for filing by the FDA. The NDA and patent holders may then initiate a patent infringement lawsuit in response to the notice of the Paragraph IV certification. The filing of a patent infringement lawsuit within 45 days of the receipt of a Paragraph IV certification automatically prevents the FDA from approving the ANDA until the earlier of 30 months, expiration of the patent, settlement of the lawsuit, or a decision in the infringement case that is favorable to the ANDA applicant. Exclusivity Market exclusivity provisions under the FD&C Act also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. An ANDA application will not be approved until any applicable non-patent exclusivity listed in the Orange Book for the referenced product has expired. Upon NDA approval of a new chemical entity (NCE), which is a drug that contains no active moiety that has been approved by the FDA in any other NDA, that drug receives five years of marketing exclusivity during which the FDA cannot receive any ANDA seeking approval of a generic version of that drug. An ANDA may be submitted one year before NCE exclusivity expires if a Paragraph IV certification is filed. If there is no listed patent in the Orange Book, there may not be a Paragraph IV certification, and, thus, no ANDA may be filed before the expiration of the exclusivity period. Certain changes to a drug, such as the approval of a new indication, new strength, or new condition of use, can be the subject of a three-year period of exclusivity from the date of approval if the application contains reports of new clinical investigations (other than bioavailability studies) conducted or sponsored by the sponsor that were essential to the approval of the application. The FDA cannot approve an ANDA for a generic drug that includes the change during the exclusivity period. In some instances, an ANDA applicant may receive approval prior to expiration of certain non-patent exclusivity if the applicant seeks, and FDA permits, the omission of such exclusivity-protected information from the ANDA prescribing information. Patent Term Restoration After NDA approval, the owner of a relevant drug patent may apply for up to a five-year patent extension. Only one patent may be extended for each regulatory review period, which is composed of two parts: a testing phase and an approval phase. The allowable patent term extension is generally calculated as half of the drug’s testing phase (the time between IND application and NDA submission) and all of the review phase (the time between NDA submission and approval) up to a maximum of five years. If the extended patent was issued during the development or review period, the calculation begins from the date of patent issuance. The review period can be shortened if the FDA determines that the applicant did not pursue approval with due diligence. The total patent term after the extension may not exceed 14 years. For patents that might expire during the application phase, the patent owner may request an interim patent extension. An interim patent extension increases the patent term by one year and may be renewed up to four times. For each interim patent extension granted, the post-approval patent extension is reduced by one year. The director of the United States Patent and Trademark Office must determine that approval of the drug covered by the patent for which a patent extension is being sought is likely. Interim patent extensions are not available for a drug for which an NDA has not been submitted. 52 Coverage and Reimbursement Sales of a product in the U.S. will depend, in part, on the extent to which such products will be covered by third-party payors, such as government healthcare programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly limiting coverage and/or reducing reimbursements for medical products and services. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a drug product may be separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the drug. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific drug products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug product does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage for the drug product. Coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time and can differ significantly from payor to payor. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the prices charged for medical products and services, examining the medical necessity, and reviewing the cost effectiveness of pharmaceutical or biological products, medical devices, and medical services, in addition to questioning safety and efficacy. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit sales of any product that receives approval. Decreases in third-party payor reimbursement or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover a product could reduce physician usage and patient demand for the product. Other Healthcare Laws In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, several other types of state and federal laws have been applied to restrict certain general business and marketing practices in the pharmaceutical industry in recent years. These laws include anti-kickback statutes, false claims statutes, price transparency and reporting, privacy and cybersecurity laws, and other healthcare laws and regulations. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving remuneration to induce, or in return for, purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any healthcare item or service reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or other federally financed healthcare programs. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act (collectively, the ACA) amended the intent element of the federal statute so that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to commit a violation. This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on the one hand and prescribers, purchasers and formulary managers, among others, on the other. Violations of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute are punishable by imprisonment, criminal fines, civil monetary penalties, and exclusion from participation in federal healthcare programs. Although there are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution or other regulatory sanctions, the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration intended to induce prescribing, purchases or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Additionally, a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute can serve as a basis for liability under the federal civil False Claims Act. Federal civil and criminal false claims laws, including the federal civil False Claims Act, prohibit any person or entity from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false claim for payment to the federal government, or knowingly making, or causing to be made, a false statement to have a false claim paid. This includes claims made to programs where the federal government reimburses, such as Medicare and Medicaid, as well as programs where the federal government is a direct purchaser, such as when it purchases off the Federal Supply Schedule. Pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly inflating drug prices they report to pricing services, which in turn were used by the government to set Medicare and Medicaid reimbursement rates, and for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. In addition, certain marketing practices, including off-label promotion, may also violate false claims laws. Additionally, the ACA amended the federal Anti-Kickback Statute such that a violation of that statute can serve as a basis for liability under the federal civil False Claims Act. Most states also have statutes or regulations similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute and civil False Claims Act, which apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. 53 Other federal statutes pertaining to healthcare fraud and abuse include the civil monetary penalties statute, which prohibits, among other things, the offer or payment of remuneration to a Medicaid or Medicare beneficiary that the offeror or payor knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary to order a receive a reimbursable item or service from a particular supplier, and the additional federal criminal statutes created by the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (HIPAA), which prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or obtain by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises any money or property owned by or under the control of any healthcare benefit program in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. In addition, HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH), and their respective implementing regulations, impose obligations on certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, known as covered entities, as well as their business associates and subcontractors that perform certain services involving the storage, use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information, and require notification to affected individuals and regulatory authorities of certain breaches of security of individually identifiable health information. HITECH increased the civil and criminal penalties that may be imposed against covered entities, business associates and possibly other persons, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorney’s fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, many state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, and often are not pre-empted by HIPAA. Each of these laws may increase the complexity, variation in requirements, restrictions and potential legal risks, and could require increased compliance costs and changes in business practices and policies. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (CCPA), imposes obligations on businesses to which it applies, including, but not limited to, providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording California residents certain rights related to their personal data, although it exempts some data processed in the context of clinical trials. In addition, the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020 (CPRA), which went into effect on January 1, 2023, imposes additional obligations on companies covered by the legislation and significantly modifies the CCPA, including by expanding consumers’ rights with respect to certain sensitive personal information. The CPRA also creates a new state agency that is vested with authority to implement and enforce the CCPA and CPRA. Other states have also enacted, proposed, or are considering proposing, data privacy laws, which could further complicate compliance efforts, increase our potential liability and adversely affect our business. Further, pursuant to the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, enacted as part of the ACA, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS), has issued a final rule that requires manufacturers of approved prescription drugs that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with certain exceptions, to collect and report information on certain payments or transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician practitioners (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, as well as investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. The reports must be submitted on an annual basis. The reported data is made available in searchable form on a public website on an annual basis. Failure to submit required information may result in civil monetary penalties. In addition, several states now require prescription drug companies to report certain expenses relating to the marketing and promotion of drug products and to report gifts and payments to individual healthcare practitioners in these states. Other states prohibit various marketing-related activities, such as the provision of certain kinds of gifts or meals. Several states, including California, Connecticut, Nevada, and Massachusetts, require pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs and/or marketing codes. Still other states require the posting of information relating to clinical studies and their outcomes. A growing number of states require the reporting of certain drug pricing information, including information pertaining to and justifying price increases and the prices of newly launched drugs, or prohibit prescription drug price gouging. In addition, certain states require pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs and/or marketing codes. Certain states and local jurisdictions also require the registration of pharmaceutical sales and medical representatives. Compliance with these laws is difficult and time consuming, and companies that do not comply with these state laws face civil penalties. 54 Efforts to ensure that business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations involve substantial costs. If a drug company’s operations are found to be in violation of any such requirements, it may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of its operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA, exclusion from participation in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other federal or state government healthcare programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, imprisonment, and reputational harm. Any action for an alleged or suspected violation can cause a drug company to incur significant legal expenses and divert management’s attention from the operation of the business, even if such action is successfully defended. U.S. Healthcare Reform In the United States there have been, and continue to be, proposals by the federal government, state governments, regulators and third-party payors to control or manage the increased costs of health care and, more generally, to reform the U.S. healthcare system. The pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. For example, in March 2010, the ACA was enacted, which was intended to broaden access to health insurance, reduce or constrain the growth of healthcare spending, enhance remedies against fraud and abuse, add new transparency requirements for the healthcare and health insurance industries, impose new taxes and fees on the health industry and impose additional health policy reforms. Several healthcare reform proposals culminated in the enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act (IRA) in August 2022, which, among other things, allows HHS to directly negotiate the selling price of a statutorily specified number of drugs and biologics each year that CMS reimburses under Medicare Part B and Part D. The negotiated price may not exceed a statutory ceiling price. Only high-expenditure single-source drugs that have been approved for at least 7 years (11 years for single-source biologics) are eligible to be selected by CMS for negotiation, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. For 2026, the first year in which negotiated prices become effective, CMS selected 10 high-cost Medicare Part D products in 2023, negotiations began in 2024, and the negotiated maximum fair price for each product has been announced. In addition, CMS has selected and announced the negotiated maximum fair price for 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs, which will become effective in 2027. For 2028, CMS has selected an additional 15 drugs, comprised of drugs covered under Medicare Part D and, for the first time, drugs payable under Medicare Part B. For 2029 and subsequent years, 20 Part B or Part D drugs will be selected. The IRA also imposes rebates on Medicare Part B and Part D drugs whose prices have increased at a rate greater than the rate of inflation and in November 2024, CMS finalized regulations for these inflation rebates. In addition, the law eliminated the “donut hole” under Medicare Part D beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost through a newly established manufacturer discount program, which requires manufacturers, in order for their drugs to be covered by Medicare Part D, to provide statutorily defined discounts on their brand (approved NDA or BLA) drugs dispensed to Part D enrollees. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. Manufacturers that fail to comply with the IRA may be subject to various penalties, including civil monetary penalties. These provisions began taking effect progressively starting in 2023 and may be subject to legal challenges. For example, the provisions related to the negotiation of selling prices of high-expenditure single-source drugs and biologics have been challenged in multiple lawsuits brought by pharmaceutical manufacturers. The outcome of these lawsuits is uncertain. Thus, while it is unclear how the IRA will be implemented, it will likely have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry and the pricing of prescription drug products. Employees and Human Capital Resources As of December 31, 2025, we had 62 employees, 60 of whom were full-time and 44 of whom were engaged in research and development activities. Approximately 44% of our employees hold Ph.D. or M.D. degrees. Women comprise approximately 50% of our employees, and individuals from underrepresented ethnic groups comprise approximately 31%. Women comprise approximately 39% of our senior leadership team and 25% of our board of directors. None of our employees are represented by a labor union or covered under a collective bargaining agreement. We consider our relationship with our employees to be good. 55 Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. It is important that we not only attract and retain the best and brightest diverse talent, but also ensure they remain engaged and can thrive in an environment that is committed to helping them grow, succeed and contribute directly to achieving our purpose. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase the success of our Company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives. Facilities Our headquarters are located in Emeryville, California where we lease and occupy 10,479 square feet of office and laboratory space. We believe that our existing facilities and new facilities under construction are sufficient to meet our near-term needs. Additional Information We were incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware in April 2015 under the name BioAge Labs, Inc. Our principal executive office is located at 5885 Hollis Street Suite 370 Emeryville California, 94608, and our telephone number is (510) 806-1445. Our website address is www.bioagelabs.com. The information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not part of, and is not incorporated by reference into, this Annual Report. We file annual, quarterly and current reports, proxy statements and other documents with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, under the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or Exchange Act. The SEC maintains an Internet website that contains reports, proxy and information statements, and other information regarding issuers, including us, that file electronically with the SEC. The public can obtain any documents that we file with the SEC at www.sec.gov. Copies of each of our filings with the SEC can also be viewed and downloaded free of charge at our website, https://ir.bioagelabs.com, after the reports and amendments are electronically filed with or furnished to the SEC. 56 It em 1A. Risk Factors. Investing in our common stock involves a high degree of risk. Before making your decision to invest in shares of our common stock, you should carefully consider the risks described below, together with the other information contained in this Annual Report, including in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations” and in our consolidated financial statements and the related notes included elsewhere in this Annual Report. The risks and uncertainties described below are not the only ones we face. Additional risks and uncertainties that we are unaware of or that we deem immaterial may also become important factors that adversely affect our business. We cannot assure you that any of the events discussed below will not occur. These events could have a material and adverse impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If that were to happen, the trading price of our common stock could decline, and you could lose all or part of your investment. These disclosures reflect the Company’s beliefs and opinions as to factors that could materially and adversely affect the Company and its securities in the future. References to past events are provided by way of example only and are not intended to be a complete listing of such events or a representation as to whether or not such factors or similar events have occurred in the past or their likelihood of occurring in the future. Risk Factors Summary Our business is subject to a number of risks and uncertainties, including, among others, the following: • We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history, have not completed any clinical trials beyond Phase 1b and have no products approved for commercial sale, which may make it difficult for investors to evaluate our business, likelihood of success and viability. • We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We are not currently profitable, and may never achieve or sustain profitability. If we are unable to achieve or sustain profitability, the market value of our common stock will likely decline. • We will require substantial additional capital to finance our operations and achieve our goals. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on terms acceptable to us, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research or development programs, any future commercialization efforts or other operations. • If we are unable to advance the development of, receive regulatory approval for and ultimately successfully commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates we may develop, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed. • Drug development is a lengthy and expensive process, the outcome of clinical testing is inherently uncertain, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. We may incur additional costs or experience additional delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of BGE-102, our APJ programs or any future product candidates for many reasons, including a failure to replicate positive results from earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials in future preclinical studies or clinical trials. • We may develop future product candidates in combination with other therapies, which would expose us to additional risks. • We expect to expand our development, clinical and regulatory capabilities and operations as we grow, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations. • Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly or may fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, each of which may cause our stock price to fluctuate or decline. • Negative results or publicity for one drug for atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk reduction, diabetic macular edema (DME), or obesity could have a substantial impact on all drugs and product candidates for ASCVD risk reduction, DME, or obesity, including any potential product candidates we may have in the future. • We are subject to securities litigation, which is expensive and could divert management attention. • We previously identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. Although we have remediated these material weaknesses, we may identify additional material weaknesses or other deficiencies in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, which could result in material misstatements of our financial statements or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. 57 • We rely, and intend to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct clinical trials and perform some of our research and preclinical studies. If these third parties do not satisfactorily carry out their contractual duties, fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or do not meet expected deadlines, our development programs may be delayed or subject to increased costs or we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval, each of which may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. • The manufacture of pharmaceutical products, including BGE-102 our APJ programs or any future product candidates, is complex. Our third-party manufacturers may encounter difficulties in production, which could delay or entirely halt their ability in the future to supply our product candidates for clinical trials or, if approved, for commercial sale. Risks Related to Our Financial Position, Limited Operating History and Need for Additional Capital We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history, have not completed any clinical trials beyond Phase 1b and have no products approved for commercial sale, which may make it difficult for investors to evaluate our business, likelihood of success and viability. We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history on which to base your investment decision. Drug development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. It entails substantial upfront capital expenditures and significant risk that any product candidate will fail to demonstrate adequate efficacy or an acceptable safety profile, gain regulatory approval or become commercially viable. We commenced operations in 2015, have no products approved for commercial sale and have never generated any revenue. To date, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to identifying, acquiring and developing our product candidates and licensed technologies, building our pipeline, performing research, conducting preclinical studies and early-stage clinical trials, organizing and staffing our company, business planning, establishing and maintaining our intellectual property portfolio, establishing arrangements with third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates, raising capital and providing general and administrative support for these operations. To date, we have funded our operations with proceeds from sales of our redeemable convertible preferred stock, convertible notes, proceeds from the sale of our common stock, and stock option exercises. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully complete any clinical trials beyond Phase 1b for our former lead product, azelaprag. Additionally, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial-scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. As a result, it may be more difficult for you to accurately predict our likelihood of success and viability than it could be if we had a longer operating history. In addition, we may encounter unforeseen expenses, difficulties, complications, delays and other known and unknown factors and risks frequently experienced by biopharmaceutical companies. We also may need to transition from a company with a research and development focus to a company capable of supporting commercial activities. We have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully overcome such risks and difficulties, or to make such a transition. If we do not adequately address these risks and difficulties or successfully make such a transition, our business will suffer. We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We are not currently profitable, and may never achieve or sustain profitability. If we are unable to achieve or sustain profitability, the market value of our common stock will likely decline. We have incurred significant operating losses since our inception and expect to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future. We do not have any products approved for sale and have not generated any product revenue since our inception. If our future product candidates are not successfully developed, approved and commercialized, we may never generate significant revenue, if we generate any revenue at all. Our net losses were $80.6 million and $71.1 million for the years ended December 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of December 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $333.4 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with the development of, and in-licensing of intellectual property related to, our former product candidate azelaprag, the research and development of our NLRP3 programs, our longitudinal human aging platform, and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. BGE-102 and any future product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources before we would be able to apply for or receive regulatory approvals and begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate these losses will increase substantially in connection with our planned and ongoing clinical trials for BGE-102, an NLRP3 inhibitor for patients with elevated cardiovascular risk or diabetic macular edema, our planned development of APJ agonists, and as we continue our development of, seek regulatory approval for and potentially commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates we may develop. 58 In addition, in May 2022, we entered into a loan and security agreement (the Loan Agreement) with SVB Innovative Credit Growth Fund IX, LP and Innovative Credit Growth Fund VIII-A, LP (collectively, the Lenders) pursuant to which we were able to borrow up to an aggregate of $25.0 million across two potential tranches until December 31, 2023 (the Term Loan). The Term Loan is secured by a lien covering substantially all of our assets, but not including our intellectual property or non-assignable licenses. In connection with the Term Loan, the Lenders were concurrently issued warrants to purchase 24,968 shares of our common stock at an exercise price of $10.26 per share, with a term of 10 years. The Loan Agreement required us to pay monthly interest payments until November 1, 2023, after which we commenced monthly principal payments. As of December 31, 2025, we had $2.0 million outstanding principal under the Term Loan. The Term Loan matures by April 1, 2026. For additional information about the Loan Agreement, see Note 5 to our consolidated financial statements included elsewhere in this Annual Report. To become and remain profitable, we must succeed in developing, obtaining regulatory approvals for, and eventually commercializing products that generate significant revenue. This will require us to be successful in a range of challenging activities, including identifying, discovering, developing, in-licensing or acquiring any future product candidates, completing clinical trials of our product candidates, obtaining regulatory approval for BGE-102 and any future product candidates, and manufacturing, marketing, and selling any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval. We are only in the preliminary stages of these activities. We may never succeed in these activities and, even if we do, may never generate revenue that is significant enough to achieve profitability. Because of the numerous risks and uncertainties associated with biopharmaceutical product development, we are unable to accurately predict the timing or amount of increased expenses or when, or if, we will be able to achieve profitability. Even if we do achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable may have an adverse effect on the value of our company and could impair our ability to raise capital, expand our business, maintain our research and development efforts, diversify our product candidates, achieve our strategic objectives or even continue our operations. A decline in the value of our company could also cause you to lose all or part of your investment. We will require substantial additional capital to finance our operations and achieve our goals. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on terms acceptable to us, we may be forced to delay, reduce or eliminate our research or development programs, any future commercialization efforts or other operations. Developing pharmaceutical products, including conducting preclinical studies and clinical trials, is a very time-consuming, expensive 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 substantially in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we advance our lead product candidate, BGE-102, through clinical development and any future product candidates through preclinical and clinical development. We expect increased expenses as we continue our research and development, initiate clinical trials, seek to expand our product pipeline and clinical applications, seek regulatory approval for our current and future product candidates and invest in our organization. In addition, if we obtain regulatory approval for any of our product candidates, we expect to incur significant commercialization expenses related to product manufacturing, marketing, sales and distribution. Because the outcome of any preclinical study or clinical trial is highly uncertain, we cannot reasonably estimate the actual amount of capital necessary to successfully complete the development and commercialization of our product candidates. We had $285.1 million in cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of December 31, 2025, of which $4.0 million were long-term marketable securities. Based on our current operating plan, we estimate that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities as of the filing date of this Annual Report will be sufficient to fund our operations and capital expenses through 2029. Changes beyond our control may occur that would cause us to use our available capital before that time, including changes in and progress of our drug development activities and changes in regulation. Our future capital requirements will be dependent on many factors, including: • the progress, timing and results of clinical trials for our lead product candidate, BGE-102, or any future product candidates; • the extent to which we develop, in-license or acquire any future product candidates or technologies; • the number of future product candidates and additional indications for our current product candidates we may pursue, and the preclinical studies and clinical trials necessary to develop them; • the costs, timing and outcome of seeking regulatory approvals of our current or future product candidates; • the scope and costs of making arrangements with third-party manufacturers, or establishing manufacturing capabilities, for both clinical and commercial supplies of our current or future product candidates; 59 • the costs involved in growing our organization to the size needed to allow for the research, development and potential commercialization of our current or future product candidates; • the costs associated with commercializing any approved product candidates, including establishing sales, marketing, market access and distribution capabilities; • to the extent we pursue strategic collaborations, including collaborations to commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates, our ability to establish and maintain collaborations on favorable terms, if at all, as well as the timing and amount of any milestone or royalty payments we are required to make or are eligible to receive under such collaborations or our current licenses; • the costs associated with completing any post-marketing studies or trials required by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) or other regulatory authorities; • the revenue, if any, received from commercial sales of BGE-102 or any future product candidates, if any are approved; • the costs of preparing, filing and prosecuting patent applications, maintaining and enforcing our intellectual property rights and defending intellectual property-related claims that we may become subject to, including any litigation costs and the outcome of such litigation; and • the costs associated with potential product liability claims, including the costs associated with obtaining insurance against such claims and with defending against such claims. We will require additional capital to complete our planned preclinical development programs and advance any product candidates into clinical trials in order to seek regulatory approval, and we anticipate needing to raise additional capital to complete the development of, and eventually commercialize, any of our product candidates, if approved. For example, we are party to the Sales Agreement with Leerink relating to the sale and issuance, from time to time, of shares of our common stock in at-the-market equity offerings with an aggregate offering price up to $75.0 million. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on favorable terms, or at all. Our ability to raise additional funds will be dependent on financial, economic and market conditions, geopolitical issues and other factors, over which we may have limited or no control. 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. If adequate funds are not available on commercially acceptable terms when needed, we may be forced to delay, reduce or terminate the development or commercialization, if approved, of all or part of our research programs or future product candidates or we may be unable to take advantage of future business opportunities. Furthermore, any additional capital-raising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our current and any future product candidates, if approved. Changing circumstances, some of which may be beyond our control, could cause us to consume capital significantly faster than we currently anticipate, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned. We will be required to obtain further funding through public or private equity financings, debt financings, collaborative agreements, licensing arrangements or other sources of financing, which may dilute our stockholders or restrict our operating activities. We do not have any committed external source of funds. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, each investor’s ownership interests will be diluted, and the terms may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect each investor’s rights as a stockholder. Debt financing or preferred equity 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 or declaring dividends. Such restrictions could adversely impact our ability to conduct our operations and execute our business plan. If we raise additional funds through upfront payments or milestone payments pursuant to strategic collaborations with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our product candidates or grant licenses on terms that are not favorable to us. Our failure to raise capital as and when needed or on acceptable terms could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and cause the price of our common stock to decline, and we may have to delay, reduce the scope of, suspend or eliminate one or more of our research or drug development programs, preclinical studies, future clinical trials or future commercialization efforts. 60 Risk Related to Research, Discovery, Development, Regulatory Approval and Commercialization of our Product Candidates We are substantially dependent on our ability to identify and develop future product candidates. If we are unable to advance the development of, receive regulatory approval for and ultimately successfully commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates we may develop, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed. Our future success is highly dependent on our ability to identify and develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and then successfully commercialize our lead product candidate, BGE-102, and any future product candidates, which may never occur. We are early in our development efforts with respect to BGE-102, which is a brain-penetrant structurally novel small molecule inhibitor of NLRP3 that has a novel binding site. We are also developing APJ agonists, which are in earlier stages of development. We currently have no products that are approved for sale in any jurisdiction. There can be no assurance that BGE-102 or any future product candidates we develop will achieve success in their respective clinical trials or obtain regulatory approval. We may also become dependent on product candidates that we may develop or acquire in the future. Given our early stage of development, it may be several years, if at all, before we have demonstrated the safety and efficacy of a product candidate sufficient to warrant approval for commercialization. Our ability to generate product revenue, which we do not expect will occur for many years, if ever, will be heavily dependent on the successful development and eventual commercialization of BGE-102, our APJ programs and any future product candidates. The success of BGE-102 and any future product candidates will be dependent on several factors, including the following: • successful and timely completion of preclinical studies and clinical trials demonstrating attractive, competitive target product profiles for our product candidates; • clearance of INDs by the FDA or other similar clinical trial applications from other regulatory authorities for our future clinical trials for our pipeline product candidates; • timely and successful enrollment of patients in, and completion of, clinical trials with favorable results; • demonstration of safety, efficacy and acceptable risk-benefit profiles of our product candidates to the satisfaction of the FDA and other comparable foreign regulatory agencies; • receipt of regulatory approvals from applicable regulatory authorities, if granted, including the completion of any required post-marketing studies or trials and available funding to perform any post-marketing commitments; • raising additional funds necessary to complete clinical development of and commercialize our current or any future product candidates; • obtaining, protecting and enforcing our patent, trade secret and other intellectual property and regulatory exclusivity for our current and future product candidates; • making arrangements with third-party manufacturers, or establishing manufacturing capabilities, for both clinical and commercial supplies of our current or future product candidates and ensuring a resilient, effective supply chain that produces supply that outpaces demand; • developing and implementing marketing and reimbursement strategies, as well as adequate demand forecasts for supply and sales planning; • establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and launching commercial sales of our products, if and when approved, whether alone or in collaboration with others in a market where promotional sales approaches are rapidly moving to digital platforms; • demonstration of product characteristics attractive to physicians, patients, advocates, payors and caregivers; • acceptance of our products, if and when approved, by patients, the medical community and third-party payors underpinned by adequate health economic data and a meaningful value proposition; • effectively competing with other therapies, including those that have not yet entered the market; 61 • obtaining and maintaining third-party payor coverage and adequate reimbursement in both public and private payor spaces, given the significant number of obese patients in the United States who may benefit from our product candidates; • obtaining appropriate support from patient advocacy organizations; • addressing any delays in our clinical trials resulting from any major natural disasters, health pandemics or significant political events; and • maintaining a continued acceptable safety profile of the products following approval. Many of these factors are beyond our control, and it is possible that none of our product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval even if we expend substantial time and resources seeking such approval. If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business. For example, our business could be harmed if clinical trial results for future product candidates show unexpected adverse events or a lack of efficacy in the indications we intend to treat or do not meet the clinical endpoints, or if we experience other regulatory or developmental issues. For instance, in December 2024, we announced the discontinuation of our Phase 2 clinical trial of our former lead product candidate azelaprag following observation of liver transaminitis without clinically significant symptoms in some subjects receiving azelaprag. Due to our limited resources and access to capital, we must, and have in the past decided to, prioritize development of certain potential product candidates over other potential product candidates. These decisions may prove to have been wrong and may adversely affect our ability to develop our own programs or our attractiveness as a commercial partner, and may ultimately have an impact on our commercial success. Because we have limited resources and access to capital to fund our operations, we must decide which product candidates to pursue and the amount of resources to allocate to each. Our decisions concerning the allocation of research, collaboration, management and financial resources toward particular product candidates or therapeutic areas may not lead to the development of viable commercial products and may divert resources away from better opportunities. Similarly, any decisions to delay, terminate or collaborate with third parties in respect of certain product development programs may also prove not to be optimal and could cause us to miss valuable opportunities. If we make incorrect determinations regarding the market potential of any future product candidates or misread trends in the biopharmaceutical industry, our business, financial condition and results of operations would be materially adversely affected. Drug development is a lengthy and expensive process, the outcome of clinical testing is inherently uncertain, and results of earlier studies and trials may not be predictive of future trial results. We may incur additional costs or experience additional delays in completing, or ultimately be unable to complete, the development and commercialization of BGE-102, our APJ programs or any future product candidates for many reasons, including a failure to replicate positive results from earlier preclinical studies or clinical trials in future preclinical studies or clinical trials. On August 15, 2025, we announced that the first patient was dosed in our Phase 1 SAD / MAD clinical trial for BGE-102. It is impossible to predict when or if BGE-102 or any future product candidates will prove effective and safe in humans or will receive regulatory approval. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to commercialize any product candidate, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and lengthy, complex and expensive clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans. Clinical testing can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the clinical trial process. The results of preclinical studies and early clinical trials of BGE-102 or any future product candidates, or a competitor’s product candidate in the same class, may not be predictive of the results of later-stage clinical trials. For example, despite encouraging results from our Phase 1b bed rest atrophy clinical trial and the lack of any negative safety signals in other Phase 1 clinical trials of azelaprag, in January 2025, we announced the discontinuation of the azelaprag program following observation of liver transaminitis without clinically significant symptoms in some subjects receiving azelaprag in our Phase 2 clinical trial. Interim, topline or preliminary results of a clinical trial are not necessarily indicative of final results. We may be unable to establish benefit on clinical endpoints that applicable regulatory authorities would consider clinically meaningful, and a clinical trial can fail at any stage of testing. Differences in trial design between early-stage clinical trials and later-stage clinical trials make it difficult to extrapolate the results of earlier clinical trials to later clinical trials. Moreover, clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain regulatory approval of their products. A number of companies in the biopharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in advanced clinical trials due to lack of efficacy or to unfavorable safety profiles, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials. There is typically a high rate of failure of product candidates proceeding through clinical trials, particularly in the earlier 62 stages of development. Most product candidates that commence clinical trials are never approved as products, and there can be no assurance that any of our future clinical trials will ultimately be successful or support clinical development of any future product candidates. We may experience delays in initiating or completing clinical trials of our future product candidates. We also may experience unforeseen events during, or as a result of, any future clinical trials that we conduct that could delay or prevent our ability to receive regulatory approval or commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates, including: • regulators, institutional review boards (IRBs) or ethics committees may not authorize us or our investigators to commence a clinical trial or conduct a clinical trial at a prospective trial site, or may halt or suspend an ongoing clinical trial; • we may experience delays in reaching or fail to reach agreement on acceptable terms with prospective trial sites and prospective contract research organizations (CROs) the terms of which can be subject to extensive negotiation and may vary significantly among different CROs and trial sites; • clinical trial sites deviating from the trial protocol or dropping out of a trial; • clinical trials of any product candidates may fail to show safety or efficacy, produce negative or inconclusive results and we may decide, or regulators may require us, to conduct additional preclinical studies or clinical trials or we may decide to abandon product development programs; • failure of our current or future product candidates in clinical trials to demonstrate important functional or patient-reported outcomes; • the number of subjects required for clinical trials of any product candidates may be larger than we anticipate, enrollment in these clinical trials may be slower than we anticipate or subjects may drop out of these clinical trials or fail to return for post-treatment follow-up at a higher rate than we anticipate; • our third-party contractors may fail to comply with regulatory requirements or meet their contractual obligations to us in a timely manner, or at all, or may deviate from the clinical trial protocol or drop out of the trial, which may require that we add new clinical trial sites or investigators; • we may elect, or regulators, IRBs, or ethics committees may require, that we or our investigators, suspend or terminate clinical research or trials for various reasons, including noncompliance with regulatory requirements or a finding that the participants in our trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks; • the cost of clinical trials of BGE-102 or any future product candidates may be greater than we anticipate, and we may not have sufficient funds to complete such trials; • the quality of BGE-102 or any future product candidates or other materials necessary to conduct clinical trials of BGE-102 or any future product candidates may be inadequate to initiate or complete a given clinical trial; • our inability to manufacture sufficient quantities of BGE-102 or any future product candidates for use in clinical trials; • our inability to meet drug specifications suitable for use in clinical trials and commercial applications; • reports from clinical testing of other therapies may raise safety or efficacy concerns about BGE-102 or any future product candidates; • the receipt of feedback from regulatory authorities that requires us to modify the design of our clinical trials; • our failure to establish an appropriate safety profile for a product candidate based on clinical or preclinical data for such product candidate as well as data emerging from other molecules in the same class as BGE-102 or any future product candidates; and • the FDA or other regulatory authorities may require us to submit additional data such as long-term toxicology studies or impose other requirements before permitting us to initiate a clinical trial. We could also encounter additional delays if a future clinical trial is suspended or terminated by us, the IRBs of the institutions in which such trials are being conducted, or the FDA or other regulatory authorities, or if a clinical trial is recommended for suspension or termination by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial. A suspension or termination may be imposed due to a number of factors, including failure to conduct the clinical trial in accordance with regulatory requirements, including the FDA’s Good Clinical Practice (GCP) regulations, or our clinical protocols, inspection of the clinical 63 trial operations or trial site by the FDA or other regulatory authorities resulting in the imposition of a clinical hold, unforeseen safety issues or adverse side effects, failure to demonstrate a benefit from using a product or treatment, failure to establish or achieve clinically meaningful trial endpoints, changes in governmental regulations or administrative actions or lack of adequate funding to continue the clinical trial. Clinical studies may also be delayed or terminated as a result of ambiguous or negative interim results. Many of the factors that cause, or lead to, a delay in the commencement or completion of clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of BGE-102 or any future product candidates. Further, the FDA or other regulatory authorities may disagree with our clinical trial design and our interpretation of data from clinical trials, or may change the requirements for approval even after they have reviewed and commented on the design for our clinical trials. We cannot predict with any certainty the schedule for commencement and completion of future clinical trials. Further, conducting clinical trials in foreign countries, as we have done and may do in the future 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 protocol as a result of differences in healthcare services or cultural customs, managing additional administrative burdens associated with foreign regulatory schemes, as well as political and economic risks relevant to such foreign countries. If we are required to conduct additional clinical trials or other testing of our current or future product candidates beyond those that we currently contemplate, if we are unable to successfully complete clinical trials of our current or future product candidates or other testing in a timely manner, if the results of these trials or tests are not positive or are only modestly positive or if there are safety concerns, we may incur unplanned costs, be delayed in seeking and obtaining regulatory approval, if we receive such approval at all, receive more limited or restrictive regulatory approval, be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements or have the drug removed from the market after obtaining regulatory approval. Additionally, if the results of our clinical trials are inconclusive or if there are safety concerns or serious adverse events associated with our product candidates, we may: • be delayed in obtaining regulatory approval, if at all; • obtain approval for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired or may have restricted duration expectations or guidance; • obtain approval with labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings; • be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; • be required to perform additional clinical trials to support approval or be subject to additional post- marketing testing requirements; • have regulatory authorities withdraw, or suspend, their approval of the drug or impose restrictions on its distribution in the form of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy (REMS); • be subject to the addition of labeling statements, such as warnings or contraindications; • be sued; or • experience damage to our reputation. Our drug development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or obtaining regulatory approvals. Also, delays in obtaining regulatory approval may increase commercialization costs if the competitive environment becomes more intense prior to market entry. We do not know whether any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin as planned, need to be restructured or be completed on schedule, if at all. Moreover, 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 or other regulatory authorities. The FDA or other regulatory authorities may conclude that a financial relationship between us and a principal investigator has created a conflict of interest or otherwise affected interpretation of the study. The FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority 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 or other regulatory authority, as the case may be, and may ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of one or more of our product candidates. In addition, many of the factors that cause, or lead to, termination or suspension of, or a delay in the commencement or completion of, clinical trials may also ultimately lead to the denial of regulatory approval of a product candidate. We may make formulation or manufacturing changes to our product candidates, in which case we may need to conduct additional preclinical 64 studies to bridge our modified product candidates to earlier versions. If we experience delays in the commencement or completion of our clinical trials, or if we terminate a clinical trial prior to completion, the commercial prospects of any future product candidates could be negatively impacted, and our ability to generate revenues from our current or future product candidates may be delayed or eliminated entirely. We may develop future product candidates in combination with other therapies, which would expose us to additional risks. We may develop other product candidates for use in combination with other therapies in the future. The development of product candidates for use in combination with another product may present challenges that are not faced for single agent product candidates. For example, any future clinical trial for our product candidates in combination with other therapies that is designed to evaluate efficacy could show that our product candidate does not sufficiently contribute to the observed effects of individuals who participate in these trials. Even if any future product candidates were to receive regulatory approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA 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 any future 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 FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities requiring us to conduct additional clinical trials, 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. If the FDA 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 future product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or successfully market any one or all of the future product candidates we may develop. Additionally, if the third-party providers of therapies or therapies in development used in combination with any future product candidates are unable to produce sufficient quantities for clinical trials or for commercialization of any future 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 prospects. Preliminary, topline or interim data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and/or 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 preliminary, topline or interim data from our clinical trials, such as preliminary, topline or interim data analysis from our ongoing and planned clinical trials of BGE-102. For example, we announced interim data from our Phase 1 SAD / MAD study of BGE-102 in December 2025 and January 2026. These data and related findings and conclusions may only reflect certain endpoints rather than all endpoints and are subject to change. 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 preliminary or topline 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. Preliminary or topline data also remain subject to review and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary or topline data we previously published. As a result, preliminary and topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. In addition, we may report preliminary data or interim analyses of the clinical trials we may conduct and complete, which 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 changes between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business and prospects. Further, additional disclosure of preliminary or interim data by us including, for example, preliminary or interim data that becomes available to us from our ongoing and planned clinical trials of BGE-102 or other future product candidates or by our competitors in the future could result in volatility in the price of our common stock. Further, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is typically selected from a more extensive amount of available information. 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 preliminary, topline or interim data that we report differ from later, final or actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain 65 approval for, and commercialize, our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may not be successful in applying our longitudinal human aging platform to identify additional targets with therapeutic and commercial potential or in the discovery and development of commercially viable product candidates for us or our collaborators. We use our longitudinal human aging platform to identify and prioritize potential drug targets, to assess the likelihood that we can develop a product candidate that interacts with the target to elicit the desired therapeutic effect, and to transition these insights efficiently into well supported therapeutic candidates. While we believe our platform will increase the likelihood of producing additional product candidates that provide meaningful clinical benefit, past success in identifying potential product candidates does not assure future success for our internal drug discovery programs. Our longitudinal human aging platform is novel, and we may not succeed in applying our platform to identify additional drug targets or transition these targets into promising future product candidates. We similarly cannot provide any assurance that, even if we do successfully identify additional targets, we will be able to successfully develop future product candidates and advance any such future product candidates into and through clinical development. Therefore, we are unable to predict the time and cost associated with the identification and development of any future product candidate or whether the application of our platform will result in the identification, development and ultimately regulatory approval of any future product candidates. Efforts through our platform to identify, discover, acquire or in-license, and ultimately develop, product candidates require substantial technical, financial and human resources, whether or not any such future product candidates are ultimately identified. Our efforts may initially show promise in identifying potential product candidates, yet fail to yield product candidates for clinical development or regulatory approval for many reasons, including the following: • the methodology used may not be successful in identifying any future potential product candidates; • competitors may develop alternatives that render any product candidates we develop obsolete; • any product candidates we develop may nevertheless be covered by third parties’ patents or other exclusive rights; • a product candidate may be shown, in subsequent preclinical or clinical investigations, to have harmful side effects or characteristics that indicate it is unlikely to be effective, or otherwise would not meet applicable regulatory criteria; • a product candidate may not be capable of being produced in commercial quantities at an acceptable cost, or at all; and • a product candidate may not be accepted as safe and effective by physicians, patients, the medical community or third-party payors. Our future growth may be dependent, in part, on our ability to operate in foreign markets, where we would be subject to additional regulatory burdens and other risks and uncertainties. Our future growth may be dependent, in part, on our ability to develop and commercialize BGE-102, if approved, and any future product candidates in foreign markets for which we may rely on collaboration with third parties. We are not permitted to market or promote BGE-102 or any future product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the applicable regulatory authority in that foreign market and may never receive such regulatory approval for BGE-102 or any future product candidates. To obtain separate regulatory approval in many other countries, we must comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of such countries regarding safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials and commercial sales, pricing and distribution of BGE-102 or any future product candidates, and we cannot predict success in these jurisdictions. If we fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets and receive applicable regulatory approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of BGE-102 or any future product candidates will be harmed, and our business will be adversely affected. We may not obtain foreign regulatory approvals on a timely basis, if at all. Our failure to obtain approval of BGE-102 or any future product candidates by regulatory authorities in another country may significantly diminish the commercial prospects of that product candidate and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be materially and adversely affected. Moreover, even if we obtain approval of BGE-102 or any future product candidates and ultimately commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates in foreign markets, we would be subject to the risks and uncertainties, including the burden of complying with complex and 66 changing foreign regulatory, tax, accounting and legal requirements and reduced protection of intellectual property rights in some foreign countries. We may experience difficulty enrolling or keeping patients in our clinical trials, which could delay or prevent us from proceeding with, or otherwise adversely affect, clinical trials of our product candidates. Our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition could reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, it is possible that we will be required to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which could negatively impact the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials in such clinical trial site. Delays related to patient enrollment and difficulties related to patient retention may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of our future clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates. Further, if patients drop out of our clinical trials, miss scheduled doses or follow-up visits, or otherwise fail to follow clinical trial protocols, the integrity of data from our clinical trials may be compromised or not accepted by the FDA or other regulatory authorities, which would represent a significant setback for the applicable program. Our current or future product candidates may not achieve adequate market acceptance among physicians, patients or their families, healthcare payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success. Even if our current or future product candidates receive regulatory approval, they may not gain adequate market acceptance among physicians, patients or their families, third-party payors and others in the medical community. The degree of market acceptance of any of our approved product candidates will be dependent on a number of factors, including: • the efficacy, durability and safety profile as demonstrated in clinical trials compared to alternative treatments; • the timing of market introduction of the product candidate, as well as competitive products; • the clinical indications for which a product candidate is approved; • restrictions on the use of product candidates in the labeling approved by regulatory authorities, such as boxed warnings or contraindications in labeling, or a REMS, if any, which may not be required of alternative treatments and competitor products; • the potential and perceived advantages of our current or future product candidates over alternative treatments; • the cost of treatment in relation to alternative treatments and the cost/benefit ratios of each; • the availability of coverage and adequate reimbursement by third-party payors, including government authorities, given the significant number of obese patients in the United States, and timing of relevant formulary decision-making resulting in this coverage and reimbursement; • the availability of an approved product for use as a combination therapy; • relative convenience and ease of administration in relation to competition; • the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies; • the effectiveness of sales, marketing efforts and market access; • publicity relating to our product candidates or those of our competitors; and • the approval of new therapies for the same indications. If any of our current or future product candidates are approved but do not achieve an adequate level of acceptance by physicians, hospitals, healthcare payors and patients, we may not generate or derive sufficient revenue from that product candidate and our financial results would be negatively impacted. 67 We have never commercialized a product candidate as a company before and currently lack the comprehensive, fully staffed expertise, personnel and resources to successfully commercialize any products on our own or together with suitable collaborators. If, in the future, we are unable to establish sales and marketing capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to sell and market any product we may develop, we may not be successful in commercializing those products if they are approved. We do not have a sales or marketing infrastructure and have no experience in the sales, marketing or distribution of any current or future product candidates. To achieve commercial success for any approved product, we must either develop a sales and marketing organization or outsource these functions to third parties. In the future and if any of our product candidates are approved, we may choose to build a focused sales, marketing and commercial support infrastructure to sell, or participate in sales activities with collaborators for some of our current or future product candidates. There are risks involved with both establishing our own commercial capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize any approved product candidates include: • the inability to recruit and retain adequate numbers of effective sales, marketing, coverage or reimbursement, customer service, medical affairs and other support personnel; • the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to or persuade adequate numbers of decision makers to utilize any future approved product candidates; • the inability of reimbursement professionals to negotiate arrangements for formulary access, reimbursement and other acceptance by payors; • the inability to price any of our current or future product candidates at a sufficient price point to ensure an adequate and attractive level of profitability; • restricted or closed distribution channels that make it difficult to distribute our current or future product candidates to segments of the patient population; • the lack of complementary product candidates to be offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more extensive product candidate lines; and • unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent commercialization organization. If the commercial launch of a product candidate, if approved, for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing and other commercialization capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our commercialization personnel. If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing, commercial support and distribution services, our sales revenue or the profitability of sales revenue may be lower than if we were to do so ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to commercialize our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. We may 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 product candidates effectively. If we do not establish commercialization capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates, if approved. Risks Related to Our Business and Operations Our future performance is dependent on our ability to retain key employees and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel and manage our human capital. Our ability to compete in the highly competitive biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries is largely dependent on our ability to attract, motivate and retain highly qualified managerial, clinical, scientific and medical personnel. We are highly dependent on the scientific and management expertise of Dr. Fortney, our Chief Executive Officer, the other members of our management team and other key employees and advisors. We currently do not maintain “key person” life insurance on these individuals or any of our employees. This lack of insurance means that we may not have adequate compensation for the loss of the services of any such individuals. The loss of one or more members of our management team or other key employees or advisors could delay our research and development programs and have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial 68 condition, results of operations and prospects. We are dependent on the continued service of our technical personnel, because of the highly technical nature of drug development and the specific knowledge related to BGE-102 or any future product candidates and technologies, and the specialized nature of the regulatory approval process. Because our management team and key employees are not obligated to provide us with continued service, they could terminate their employment with us at any time without penalty. In addition, job candidates and existing employees often consider the value of the stock awards they receive in connection with their employment. If the perceived benefits of our stock awards decline, either because we are a public company or for other reasons, it may harm our ability to recruit and retain highly skilled employees. Our employees may be more likely to leave us if the shares they own have significantly appreciated in value relative to the original purchase prices of the shares, or if the exercise prices of the options that they hold are significantly below the market price of our common stock. We are currently a remote-based company, with a majority of our employees working remotely, and we primarily conduct our in-person operations at our research facility in Emeryville, California. This region is headquarters to many other biopharmaceutical companies and academic and research institutions. Competition for skilled personnel in our market, and nationally, is intense and may limit our ability to hire and retain highly qualified personnel on acceptable terms or at all. We also face competition for personnel from other companies, universities, public and private research institutions, government entities and other organizations. Our industry has experienced a high rate of turnover of management personnel in recent years. Our future performance will be dependent in large part on our continued ability to attract and retain highly qualified scientific, technical and management personnel, as well as personnel with expertise in clinical testing, manufacturing, governmental regulation and commercialization. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel, the rate and success at which we can discover and develop product candidates will be limited, which could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Our quarterly and annual operating results may fluctuate significantly or may fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, each of which may cause our stock price to fluctuate or decline. We expect our operating results to be subject to quarterly fluctuations. Our net loss and other operating results will be affected by numerous factors, including: • variations in the level of expense related to the ongoing development of BGE-102 or any future development programs; • results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, or the addition or termination of future clinical trials or funding support by us, or existing or future collaborators or licensing partners; • our ability to enroll patients in clinical trials and the timing of enrollment; • the need to conduct unanticipated clinical trials or trials that are larger or more complex than anticipated; • our execution of any additional collaboration, licensing or similar arrangements, and the timing of payments we may make or receive under existing or future arrangements or the termination or modification of any such existing or future arrangements; • any intellectual property infringement lawsuit or opposition, interference or cancellation proceeding in which we may become involved; • additions and departures of key personnel; • strategic decisions by us or our competitors, such as acquisitions, divestitures, spin-offs, joint ventures, strategic investments or changes in business strategy; • regulatory developments affecting BGE-102 or any future product candidates or those of our competitors; • potential unforeseen business disruptions that increase our costs or expenses; effects of global macroeconomic events, such as inflation, tariffs, geopolitical conflicts, such as the armed conflict between the U.S. military and Iran and related disruption in the region, pandemics, natural disasters and supply chain issues, on our business and operations; and • changes in general market and economic conditions. 69 If our quarterly or annual operating results fall below the expectations of investors or securities analysts, the price of our common stock could decline substantially. Furthermore, any quarterly or annual fluctuations in our operating results may, in turn, cause the price of our common stock to fluctuate substantially. We believe that quarterly or annual comparisons of our financial results are not necessarily meaningful and should not be relied on as an indication of our future performance. We expect to expand our development, clinical and regulatory capabilities and operations as we grow, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations. We expect to increase the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of clinical development, clinical operations, manufacturing, regulatory affairs, finance, accounting, business operations, communications and other corporate development functions, and, if BGE-102 or any future product candidates receive regulatory approval, sales, marketing and distribution capabilities. If we acquire additional product candidates or enter into future collaborations, we may have to further expand our employee base beyond our current projections, which may include further preclinical research and development or regulatory operations. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth and with developing sales, marketing and distribution infrastructure, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. If we are not able to effectively manage growth and expand our operations, we may not be able to successfully implement the tasks necessary to further develop and commercialize, if approved, BGE-102 or any future product candidates and, accordingly, we may not achieve our research, development and commercialization goals. We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do, if at all. The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive, and specifically the development and commercialization of therapeutics for cardiometabolic diseases, ophthalmology, and obesity is particularly competitive. Our current and any future product candidates, if approved, will face significant competition, including from well-established, currently marketed therapies or recommended standards of care, and our failure to demonstrate a meaningful improvement to the existing standards of care may prevent us from achieving significant market penetration. Many of our competitors have significantly greater resources and experience than we do, and we may not be able to successfully compete. We face substantial competition from multiple sources, including large and specialty biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic research institutions and governmental agencies and public and private research institutions. Any future product candidates, if approved, would face competition from other approved treatments, some of which have already achieved commercial success. To compete successfully, we will need to differentiate any of our future therapies, if approved, from currently marketed drugs as well as those that may be approved in the future, meaning that we will have to demonstrate that the relative cost, method of administration, safety, tolerability or efficacy of our future therapies provides a better alternative or complement to existing and new therapies. Our commercial opportunity and likelihood of success will be reduced or eliminated if our future therapies are not ultimately demonstrated to be safer, more effective, more conveniently administered, or less expensive than the current standards of care. Furthermore, even if future therapies are able to achieve these attributes, acceptance of such therapies may be inhibited by the reluctance of physicians to switch from existing therapies, or if physicians choose to reserve our future therapies for use in limited circumstances. Many of our competitors have significantly greater financial, technical, manufacturing, marketing, sales and supply resources or experience than we have. If we obtain regulatory approval for any product candidate, we will face competition based on many different factors, including the safety and effectiveness of any future product candidates, the ease with which any future product candidates can be administered and the extent to which participants accept relatively new routes of administration, the timing and scope of regulatory approvals for these product candidates, the availability and cost of manufacturing, marketing and sales capabilities, price, reimbursement coverage and patent position. Competing products could present superior treatment alternatives, including by being more effective, safer, 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 any future product candidates. Such competitors could also recruit our employees, which could negatively impact our level of expertise and our ability to execute our business plan. Mergers and acquisitions in the biopharmaceutical and biotechnology industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Early-stage companies may also prove to be 70 significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These third parties compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified management and other personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and participants registration for clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. The estimates of market opportunity and forecasts of market growth included in this Annual Report may prove to be smaller than we believe, and even if the markets in which we compete achieve the forecasted growth, our business may not grow at similar rates, or at all. We intend to initially focus our product candidate development on treatments for ASCVD risk reduction, DME, and obesity. Our projections of addressable patient populations within any particular disease state that may benefit from treatment with our product candidates are based on our estimates. Market opportunity estimates and growth forecasts included in this Annual Report are subject to significant uncertainty and are based on assumptions and estimates. These estimates, which have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations and market research, may prove to be incorrect. Further, new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. Similarly, the percent of the population with cardiovascular risk factors, DME, and obesity could be lower than we anticipate. In both instances, the pool of potential patients that our current or any future product candidates could address could be substantially smaller than we anticipate. Additionally, the potentially addressable patient population for any future product candidates may not ultimately be amenable to treatment with any future product candidates. Our market opportunity may also be limited by future competitor treatments that enter the market. If any of our estimates prove to be inaccurate, the market opportunity for any future product candidates that we or our strategic partners develop could be significantly diminished and have an adverse material impact on our business. Negative results or publicity for one drug for ASCVD risk reduction, DME, or obesity could have a substantial impact on all drugs and product candidates for ASCVD risk reduction, DME, or obesity, including any potential product candidates we may have in the future. Our business can be affected by adverse publicity or negative public perception about us, our competitors, our future product candidates or products, if approved, or our industry or competitors generally. Adverse publicity may include publicity about ASCVD risk reduction, DME, or obesity or GLP-1R agonists generally, the efficacy, safety and quality of our future product candidates, as well as of the broader category of obesity products, including any products that our future product candidates are intended to be used in combination with, and regulatory investigations, regardless of whether these investigations involve us or the business practices or products of our competitors or our customers. Any adverse publicity or negative public perception could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Further, any adverse effects in our future clinical trials, even if not ultimately attributable to our future product candidates, and the resulting publicity could result in withdrawal of clinical trial participants, and a decrease in demand for any such future product candidates. Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be adversely affected if any of our future product candidates or products, if approved, or any similar products distributed by other companies are alleged to be or are proved to be harmful to consumers or to have unanticipated and unwanted health consequences. Our business entails a significant risk of product liability, and our ability to obtain sufficient insurance coverage could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If product liability lawsuits are brought against us, we may incur substantial liabilities and may be required to limit, delay or cease commercialization of our products. When we conduct clinical trials of our current and any future product candidates, we may be exposed to significant product liability risks inherent in the development, testing, manufacturing and marketing of therapeutic treatments. Product liability claims could delay or prevent completion of our development programs. If we succeed in marketing products, if approved, such claims could result in an FDA investigation of the safety and effectiveness of our products, our manufacturing processes and facilities or our marketing programs and potentially a recall of our products or more serious enforcement action, limitations on the approved indications for which they may be used or suspension or withdrawal of approvals. If we cannot successfully defend ourselves against product liability claims, we may incur substantial liabilities or be required to limit, delay or cease the commercialization of our products. Regardless of the merits or eventual outcome, liability claims may also result in decreased demand for our products, termination of clinical trial sites or entire trial programs, withdrawal of clinical trial participants, injury to our reputation and significant negative media attention, significant costs to defend the related litigation, a diversion of management’s time and our resources from our business operations, substantial monetary awards to trial participants or patients, loss of revenue, the inability to commercialize any products that we may develop and a decline in our stock price. 71 We currently maintain approximately $18.0 million in general liability insurance and product liability insurance in the aggregate. We may, however, need to obtain higher levels of insurance coverage for later stages of clinical development or marketing any of our product candidates. Any insurance we have or may obtain may not provide sufficient coverage against potential liabilities. Furthermore, clinical trial and product liability insurance is becoming increasingly expensive. As a result, we may be unable to obtain sufficient insurance at a reasonable cost to protect us against losses caused by product liability claims that could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Our inability to obtain and retain sufficient product liability insurance at an acceptable cost to protect against potential product liability claims could prevent or inhibit the commercialization of our product candidates. Although we will maintain such insurance, any claim that may be brought against us could result in a court judgment or settlement in an amount that is not covered, in whole or in part, by our insurance or that is in excess of the limits of our insurance coverage. Our insurance policies will also have various exclusions, and we may be subject to a product liability claim for which we have no coverage. We may have to pay any amounts awarded by a court or negotiated in a settlement that exceed our coverage limitations or that are not covered by our insurance, and we may not have, or be able to obtain, sufficient capital to pay such amounts. Our employees, independent contractors, consultants and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including noncompliance with regulatory standards and requirements and insider trading, and we may be subject to claims that our employees, consultants or independent contractors have wrongfully used or disclosed confidential information of third parties. We are exposed to the risk of employee fraud or other illegal activity by our employees, independent contractors, consultants and vendors. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless and/or negligent conduct that fails to comply with FDA regulations, provide true, complete and accurate information to the FDA or other regulatory authorities, comply with manufacturing standards we may establish, comply with healthcare fraud and abuse laws and regulations, report financial information or data accurately or disclose unauthorized activities to us. If we obtain FDA approval of any of our current or future product candidates and begin commercializing those products in the United States, our potential exposure under these laws will increase significantly, and our costs associated with compliance with these laws will likely increase. In particular, 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. Employee misconduct could also involve the improper use of information obtained in the course of clinical trials, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. It is not always possible to identify and deter employee misconduct, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to comply with such laws or regulations. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA or other regulatory authorities exclusion from participation in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, or reputational harm. We have received confidential and proprietary information from third parties. In addition, we employ individuals who were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that individuals working for or collaborating with us do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or our employees, consultants or independent contractors have inadvertently or otherwise used or disclosed confidential information proprietary to these third parties or our employees’ former employers, or that we caused an employee to breach the terms of his or her non-competition or non-solicitation agreement. We may be subject to claims that patents and applications we have filed to protect inventions of our employees, consultants, advisors or other third parties, even those related to one or more of our product candidates, are rightfully owned by their former or concurrent employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. Even if we are successful in defending against these claims, litigation could result in substantial cost and be a distraction to our management and employees. If our defenses to these claims fail, in addition to requiring us to pay monetary damages, a court could prohibit us from using technologies or features that are essential to our product candidates, if such technologies or features are found to incorporate or be derived from the trade secrets or other proprietary information of the former employers. Moreover, any such litigation or the threat thereof may adversely affect our reputation, our ability to form strategic alliances or sublicense our rights to collaborators, engage with scientific advisors or hire employees or consultants, each of which would have an adverse effect on our business, results of operations and financial condition. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management. 72 We may engage in strategic transactions that could increase our capital requirements, dilute our stockholders, cause us to incur debt or assume contingent liabilities, subject us to other risks, adversely affect our liquidity, increase our expenses and present significant distractions to our management. From time to time, we may consider strategic transactions, such as acquisitions of companies, asset purchases and out-licensing or in-licensing of intellectual property, products or technologies. Additional potential transactions that we may consider include a variety of business arrangements, including spin-offs, strategic partnerships, joint ventures, restructurings, divestitures, business combinations and investments. We may not be able to find suitable partners or acquisition candidates, and we may not be able to complete such transactions on favorable terms, if at all. Any future transactions could increase our near and long-term expenditures, result in potentially dilutive issuances of our equity securities, including our common stock, or the incurrence of debt, contingent liabilities, amortization expenses or acquired in-process research and development expenses, any of which could affect our financial condition, liquidity and results of operations. Future acquisitions may also require us to obtain additional financing, which may not be available on favorable terms or at all. These transactions may never be successful and may require significant time and attention of our management. In addition, the integration of any business that we may acquire in the future may disrupt our existing business and may be a complex, risky and costly endeavor for which we may never realize the full benefits. Furthermore, we may experience losses related to investments in other companies, including as a result of failure to realize expected benefits or the materialization of unexpected liabilities or risks, which could have a material negative effect on our results of operations and financial condition. Accordingly, although there can be no assurance that we will undertake or successfully complete any additional transactions of the nature described above, any additional transactions that we do complete could have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. In May 2022, we entered into the Loan Agreement and the Term Loan we entered into in connection with the Loan Agreement restricts our ability to pursue certain mergers, acquisitions or consolidations that we may believe to be in our best interest. Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes may be limited. We have incurred substantial losses during our history and do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may never achieve profitability. Under current law, unused U.S. federal net operating losses generated in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017, will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely but the deductibility of such federal net operating losses for any year is limited to no more than 80% of current year taxable income (without regard to certain deductions). In addition, both our current and our future net operating losses and other tax attributes may be subject to limitation under Sections 382 and 383 of the U.S. Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if we undergo, or have undergone, an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in our equity ownership by certain stockholders or groups of stockholders over a three-year period. It is possible that we have undergone one or more “ownership changes” in the past. We may also undergo ownership changes in the future as a result of shifts in the ownership of our capital stock, some of which may be outside of our control, which may further limit our ability to use our pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research tax credits) to offset our post-change income or taxes. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply to limit our use of accumulated state tax attributes. In addition, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of net operating losses is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. As a result, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use all or a material portion of our net operating losses and other tax attributes, which could adversely affect our future cash flows. Changes in tax laws or regulations that are applied adversely to us may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flows, financial condition or results of operations. New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules or regulations could be enacted at any time, which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, future changes in corporate tax rates, the realization of net deferred tax assets relating to our operations, the taxation of foreign earnings, and the deductibility of expenses could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense. In addition, under the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, as amended by the One Big Beautiful Bill Act ("OBBBA") for tax years beginning after December 31, 2021, taxpayers are required to capitalize and amortize certain research and development expenditures over fifteen years if incurred in foreign jurisdictions. For tax years beginning after December 31, 2021, and beginning on or before December 31, 2024, taxpayers generally were required to capitalize and amortize certain research and development expenditures over five years if incurred in the United States; however, beginning after that period, the OBBBA restored immediate deductibility of research and development expenditures incurred in the United 73 States and also permits certain small business taxpayers to apply these changes retroactively to tax years beginning after December 31, 2021. 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 Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended (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 Securities and Exchange Commission (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. For example, our directors or executive officers could inadvertently fail to disclose a new relationship or arrangement causing us to fail to make any related party transaction disclosures. 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. In addition, we do not have a formal risk management program for identifying and addressing risks to our business in other areas. We previously identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. Although we have remediated these material weaknesses, we may identify additional material weaknesses or other deficiencies in the future or otherwise fail to maintain an effective system of internal controls, which could result in material misstatements of our financial statements or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations. We previously identified material weaknesses in our internal control over financial reporting. A material weakness is a deficiency, or a combination of deficiencies, in internal control over financial reporting, such that there is a reasonable possibility that a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements will not be prevented or detected on a timely basis. In preparing the financial statements as of and for the years ended December 31, 2023 and 2022, management previously determined it had not maintained appropriately designed entity-level controls impacting the control environment, risk assessment procedures and monitoring activities to prevent or detect material misstatements to our consolidated financial statements, which constituted material weaknesses. Specifically, the control deficiencies related to (i) insufficient identification and assessment of risks impacting the design, implementation and operating effectiveness of internal controls over financial reporting and (ii) insufficient evaluation and determination as to whether components of internal control were present and functioning based upon evidence maintained for activity level controls, including management review controls, across substantially all of our financial statement areas. Management had also determined that it did not maintain effective information technology controls in the areas of user access, change management and segregation of duties, within the systems supporting our accounting and reporting processes. During the fiscal year ended December 31, 2024, we successfully completed the testing necessary to conclude that the material weaknesses have been remediated. Effective internal controls are necessary for us to provide reliable financial statements and prevent or detect fraud. Although the material weaknesses in internal control over financial reporting described above have been remediated, any new material weaknesses or other deficiencies identified in the future or any deficiencies in our disclosure controls and procedures, if not timely remediated, could limit our ability to prevent or detect a misstatement of our accounts or disclosures that could result in a material misstatement of our annual or interim financial statements. We cannot assure you that the remediation measures we have taken to date will be sufficient to prevent or avoid potential future material weaknesses in our internal controls. If we identify new material weaknesses in our internal controls over financial reporting, if we are unable to comply with the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in a timely manner, if we are unable to conclude that our internal controls over financial reporting are effective, or if our independent registered public accounting firm is unable to express an opinion as to the effectiveness of our internal controls over financial reporting when we are no longer an emerging growth company, investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports and the market price of our common stock could be negatively affected. As a result of such failures, we could also become subject to investigations by the stock exchange on which our securities are listed, the SEC or other regulatory authorities, and become subject to litigation from 74 investors and stockholders, which could harm our reputation and financial condition or divert financial and management resources from our regular business activities. We and the third parties with whom we work are, or may in the future be, subject to stringent and changing data privacy and security obligations. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, “process”) certain personal information and other sensitive information, including our proprietary and confidential business data, trade secrets, employee data, intellectual property, data we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and other sensitive data. The global data protection landscape is rapidly evolving and we are or may become subject to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various state, federal and foreign laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements and other obligations that govern the processing of personal, sensitive or confidential information by us and on our behalf, and we may be subject to new or additional data protection laws and regulations and face increased scrutiny from regulators as our business grows. The legislative and regulatory landscape for data privacy and security continues to evolve in jurisdictions worldwide, and there has been an increasing focus on these issues with the potential to affect our business. Various federal, state, local and foreign legislative and regulatory bodies, or self-regulatory organizations, may expand current laws, rules or regulations, enact new laws, rules or regulations or issue revised rules or guidance regarding data privacy and security that could result in fines or injunctions. Implementation standards and enforcement practices are likely to remain uncertain for the foreseeable future, and we cannot yet determine the impact future laws, regulations, standards, or perception of their requirements may have on our business. This evolution may create uncertainty in our business, affect our ability to operate in certain jurisdictions or to process personal information, necessitate the acceptance of more onerous obligations in our contracts, result in liability or impose additional costs on us. The cost of compliance with these laws, regulations and standards is high and is likely to increase in the future. Any failure or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws or regulations, our internal policies and procedures or our contracts governing our processing of personal, sensitive or confidential information could result in negative publicity, government investigations and enforcement actions, claims by third parties and damage to our reputation, any of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including comprehensive consumer privacy laws, sector-specific privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), data breach notification laws, laws regarding on-line marketing, and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). For example, the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, as amended by as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (HITECH) (collectively, HIPAA), include a privacy rule and security rule that impose among other things, certain requirements relating to the privacy, security, transmission, and breach of individually identifiable health information. We may obtain health information from third parties (including research institutions from which we obtain clinical trial data) that are subject to privacy and security requirements under HIPAA. Depending on the facts and circumstances, we could be subject to significant penalties if we violate HIPAA. Certain states have also adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, which govern the privacy, processing and protection of health-related and other personal information. Such laws and regulations will be subject to interpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our future customers and strategic partners. Over a dozen states have also passed comprehensive consumer privacy laws, and similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, some of which we may become subject to. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act of 2020) (CCPA) imposes obligations on businesses that meet certain thresholds that process the personal information of California residents (including employees based in California). These obligations include, but are not limited to, providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording California residents certain rights related to their personal information. The CCPA also provides for fines of up to $7,500 per intentional violation and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. The 2020 amendments to the CCPA also created the California Privacy Protection Agency, a new enforcement agency whose sole responsibility is to enforce the CCPA and is empowered to create new CCPA regulations. In addition to government activity, privacy advocacy groups and technology and other industries are considering various new, additional or different self-regulatory standards that may place additional burdens on us. In addition to government activity, 75 privacy advocacy groups and technology and other industries continue to consider new or revised self-regulatory standards that may place additional burdens on us. Outside the United States, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation (EU GDPR) and the United Kingdom’s GDPR (UK GDPR) impose strict requirements for processing the personal data of individuals. Among other requirements, the GDPR and UK GDPR (and certain other foreign jurisdictions) regulate the cross- border transfer of personal data, which could make it more difficult for us to transfer information across jurisdictions (such as transferring or receiving personal data that originates in the European Union (EU), or the United Kingdom to countries such as the United States which are not considered by the EU or United Kingdom to provide adequate protection of personal data). In October 2022, the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework was implemented, and the European Commission adopted an adequacy decision on July 10, 2023 that set conditions for personal data transfers from the EU to certified companies in the United States without additional safeguards in place. While we strive to adhere to all requirements to transfer information across jurisdictions using safeguards endorsed by government guidance (such as using the Standard Contractual Clauses approved by the European Commission), we must still adapt to changing guidance and will follow any anticipated litigation closely. As the regulatory guidance and enforcement landscape in relation to data transfers continue to develop, we could suffer additional costs, complaints and/or regulatory investigations or fines; we may have to stop using certain tools and vendors and make other operational changes; and/or it could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Any such changes in the law related to the use of personal information or data could compromise our ability to pursue our growth strategy effectively or even prevent us from providing certain products in jurisdictions in which we currently operate or may operate in the future. Complying with these numerous, complex and often changing regulations is expensive and difficult, and failure to comply with any data privacy or security laws, whether by us, one of our third-party CDMOs, partners or another third party, could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects and result in expenses which include, but are not limited to: investigation costs, material fines and penalties, compensatory, special, punitive and statutory damages, litigation, consent orders regarding our privacy and security practices, requirements that we provide notices, credit monitoring services and/or credit restoration services or other relevant services to impacted individuals, adverse actions against our licenses to do business, reputational damage and injunctive relief. In addition to data privacy and security laws, we are also bound by contractual obligations related to data privacy and security. We may be contractually required to indemnify and hold harmless third parties from the costs or consequences of non-compliance with any laws, rules and regulations or other legal obligations relating to privacy or any inadvertent or unauthorized use or disclosure of data that we store or handle as part of operating our business. Any of these events could adversely affect our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: loss of customers; interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including clinical trials); inability to process personal information or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. We cannot assure you that our CROs, CDMOs or other third-party service providers with access to our or our suppliers’, manufacturers’, clinical trial participants’ and employees’ sensitive information for which we are responsible will not breach contractual obligations imposed by us, or that they will not experience data security incidents, which could have a corresponding effect on our business, including putting us in breach of our obligations under privacy laws and regulations and/or which could in turn adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Our contractual measures and our own privacy and security-related safeguards cannot completely protect us from the risks associated with the third-party processing of such information. Any of the foregoing could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We also publicly post our privacy policies and practices concerning our collection, use, disclosure and other processing of the personal information provided to us. Although we endeavor to comply with our public statements and documentation, we may at times fail to do so or be perceived to have failed to do so. Our publication of our privacy policies and other statements we publish that provide promises and assurances about privacy and security can subject us to potential state and federal action if they are found to be deceptive, unfair or misrepresentative of our actual practices. Any actual or perceived failure by us to comply with federal, state or foreign laws, rules or regulations, industry standards, contractual or other legal obligations, or any actual, perceived or suspected cybersecurity incident, whether or not resulting in unauthorized access to, or acquisition, release or transfer of personal information or other data, may result in enforcement actions and prosecutions, private litigation, significant fines, penalties and censure, claims for damages by customers and other affected individuals, regulatory inquiries and investigations or adverse publicity and could cause our customers to lose trust in us, any of which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 76 We are dependent on the efficient and uninterrupted operation of our information technology systems, and those systems, or those of our third-party service providers, may be impacted by security incidents, cyberattacks, loss of data and other disruptions, which could adversely impact our business. We are increasingly dependent on information technology systems and infrastructure to operate our business. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, store, generate, transfer, and transmit (collectively, “process”) confidential information (such as intellectual property, proprietary business data and patient data). It is critical that we do so in a secure manner to maintain the confidentiality and integrity of such information. We also outsource elements of our information technology systems and operations to third parties (such as vendors, contractors and consultants), and as a result we rely on and take steps designed to manage a number of third- parties who have access to and process our confidential information. While we take steps designed to detect, mitigate, and remediate vulnerabilities in our information systems, we may not detect or be able to remediate all such vulnerabilities. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures and patches designed to address identified vulnerabilities, if at all. Despite the implementation of these security measures, our information technology systems and those of our third-party vendors and other contractors and consultants have been in the past and may be in the future potentially vulnerable to service interruptions, system malfunction, accidents by our employees or third-party service providers, natural disasters, terrorism, war, global pandemics, and telecommunication and electrical failures. We may also experience security incidents from inadvertent or intentional actions by our employees, third-party vendors, contractors, consultants, business partners and/or other third parties, including theft, fraud or unauthorized access to or use of our information technology systems, or attack or damage from hacking, cyberattacks or supply chain attacks by malicious third parties and sophisticated nation-state and nation-state- supported actors, which may compromise our system infrastructure, or that of our third-party vendors and other contractors and consultants, impede our ability to conduct business, delay our financial reporting or lead to data leakage. Any of the above concerns could apply to our third-party suppliers and vendors as well. The risk of a security incident or disruption, particularly through cyberattacks or cyber intrusion, including by computer hackers, foreign governments and cyber terrorists, has generally increased as the number, intensity, and sophistication of attempted attacks and intrusions from around the world have increased. We may not be able to anticipate all types of security threats, nor implement preventive measures effective against all such security threats. Any breach, loss or compromise of confidential proprietary, or personal information may also subject us to liability, government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections), additional reporting requirements and/or oversight, restrictions on processing sensitive information (including personal data), litigation (including class claims), indemnification obligations, negative publicity, reputational harm, monetary fund diversions, diversion of management attention, interruptions in our operations (including availability of data), financial loss and other similar harms. If the information technology systems of our third-party vendors and other contractors and consultants become subject to disruptions or security incidents, we may have insufficient recourse against such third parties and we may have to expend significant resources to mitigate the impact of such an event, and to develop and implement protections to prevent future events of this nature from occurring. Further, remote work may increase the risks to our information technology systems and data, as remotely working employees utilize network connections, computers and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit or in public locations. Disruptions of our information technology systems or those of our third-party vendors and other contractors and consultants, or security breaches could result in the loss, misappropriation and/or unauthorized access, use, or disclosure of, or the prevention of access to, confidential information (including trade secrets or other intellectual property or proprietary business information) and claims by our counterparties that we have failed to comply with legal or contractual obligations, which could result in financial, legal, business, and reputational harm to us. There can be no assurance that the limitations of liability in our contracts would be enforceable or adequate to protect us from liabilities and damage and we may not have adequate insurance coverage to cover losses, or all types of costs, expenses and losses, we could incur with respect to security breaches or disruptions. 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 deductible or co-insurance requirements), could have an adverse effect on our business. In addition, we cannot be sure that our existing insurance coverage and coverage for errors and omissions will continue to be available on acceptable terms or that our insurers will not deny coverage as to any future claim. 77 We are an “emerging growth company” and a “smaller reporting company” and the reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies or smaller reporting companies could make our common stock less attractive to investors. We are 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 (i) not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, (ii) reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our Annual Report and our periodic reports and proxy statements and (iii) exemptions from the requirements of holding nonbinding advisory stockholder votes on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not approved previously. In addition, as an emerging growth company, we are only required to provide two years of audited financial statements and two years of selected financial data in our Annual Report. We could be an emerging growth company until December 31, 2029, 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 equals or exceeds $700.0 million as of the prior June 30, 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. Under the JOBS Act, emerging growth companies can also delay adopting new or revised accounting standards until such time as those standards apply to private companies. We have elected to take advantage of the benefits of this extended transition period. Our financial statements may therefore not be comparable to those of companies that comply with such new or revised accounting standards. Until the date that we are no longer an “emerging growth company” or affirmatively and irrevocably opt out of the exemption provided by Section 7(a)(2)(B) of the Securities Act, upon issuance of a new or revised accounting standard that applies to our financial statements and that has a different effective date for public and private companies, we will disclose the date on which adoption is required for non-emerging growth companies and the date on which we will adopt the recently issued accounting standard. We are also a “smaller reporting company” as defined in the Exchange Act. We will continue to be a smaller reporting company if either (i) the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $250.0 million, measured as of the last business day of our most recently completed second quarter or (ii) our annual revenue is less than $100.0 million during the most recently completed fiscal year and the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates is less than $700.0 million. We may continue to be a smaller reporting company even after we cease to be an emerging growth company, so we may continue to rely on exemptions from certain disclosure requirements that are available to smaller reporting companies. Specifically, as a smaller reporting company we may choose to present only the two most recent fiscal years of audited financial statements, we are not required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act and, similar to emerging growth companies, smaller reporting companies have reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation. Risks Related to Our Reliance on Third Parties We may, in the future, seek to enter into collaborations or other agreements with third parties for the discovery, development and commercialization of product candidates, if approved, and we may not be successful in doing so. If those collaborations are not successful, we may not be able to capitalize on the market potential of BGE-102 and any future product candidates. We may in the future seek third-party collaborators for research, development and commercialization of BGE-102 or any future product candidates. Biopharmaceutical companies are our prior and likely future collaborators for any marketing, distribution, development, licensing or broader collaboration arrangements. With respect to our existing collaboration agreements, and what we expect will be the case with any future collaboration agreements, we have and would expect to 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. 78 Collaborations involving our technology currently pose, and will continue to pose, the following risks to us: • collaborators have significant discretion in determining the efforts and resources that they will apply to these collaborations and may not perform their obligations as expected; • collaborators may de-emphasize or not pursue development and commercialization of any product candidates or may elect not to continue or renew development or commercialization programs based on clinical trial results, changes in the collaborators’ strategic focus, including as a result of a sale or disposition of a business unit or development function, 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 any 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; • a collaborator with marketing and distribution rights to multiple products may not commit sufficient resources to the marketing and distribution of our product, if approved, relative to other products; • collaborators may not properly obtain, maintain, defend or enforce our intellectual property rights or may use our proprietary information and intellectual property in such a way as to invite litigation or other intellectual property related proceedings that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information and intellectual property or expose us to potential litigation or other intellectual property related proceedings; • disputes may arise between the collaborators and us that result in the delay or termination of the research, development or, if approved, commercialization of any 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 to pursue further development or, if approved, commercialization of the applicable product candidates; • collaboration agreements may not lead to development or, if approved, commercialization of product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all; and • if a future collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or, if approved, commercialization program could be delayed, diminished or terminated. If our collaborations do not result in the successful development and commercialization of product candidates, or if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future research funding or milestone or royalty payments under the collaboration. Furthermore, even if we receive such payments, they will likely result in payment obligations under license agreements with our licensors, which could be substantial. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these collaboration agreements, or if the funding is substantially offset by payment obligations to our licensors, our development of product candidates could be delayed, and we may need additional resources to develop product candidates. In addition, if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may find it more difficult to find a suitable replacement collaborator or attract new collaborators, and our development programs may be delayed or the perception of us in the business and financial communities could be adversely affected. As a result of the foregoing, our current and any future collaboration agreements may not lead to development or commercialization of our product candidates in the most efficient manner or at all. Moreover, if a collaborator of ours were to be involved in a business combination, the continued pursuit and emphasis on our product development or commercialization program could be delayed, diminished or terminated. Any failure to successfully develop or commercialize our product candidates pursuant to our current or any future collaboration agreements could have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 79 We rely, and intend to continue to rely, on third parties to conduct our clinical trials and perform some of our research and preclinical studies. If these third parties do not satisfactorily carry out their contractual duties, fail to comply with applicable regulatory requirements or do not meet expected deadlines, our development programs may be delayed or subject to increased costs or we may be unable to obtain regulatory approval, each of which may have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We do not have the ability to independently conduct all aspects of our preclinical studies and clinical trials ourselves. As a result, we are dependent on third parties to conduct preclinical studies of certain future product candidates, as well as clinical trials for any future product candidates, as well as potentially preclinical studies of certain future product candidates. The timing of the initiation and completion of these trials will therefore be partially controlled by such third parties and may result in delays to our development programs. Since such third parties partially control the progress of these trials, they may also publish the data related to these trials prior to obtaining or without our approval for doing so. For example, we expect CROs, independent clinical investigators and consultants to play a significant role in the conduct of these trials and the subsequent collection and analysis of data. However, these investigators, CROs and other third parties are not our employees, and we will not be able to control all aspects of their activities. Nevertheless, we are responsible for ensuring that each clinical trial is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol and legal, regulatory and scientific standards, and our reliance on the investigators, CROs and other third parties does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. We and our CROs are required to comply with GCP requirements, which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA for product candidates in clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these GCP requirements through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, clinical trial investigators and clinical trial sites. If we or any of our CROs or clinical trial sites fail to comply with applicable GCP requirements, the data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and the FDA may require us to perform additional clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that, upon inspection, the FDA will determine that our clinical trials comply with GCPs. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with product produced under current Good Manufacturing Practices (cGMP) regulations. Our failure or the failure of third parties on whom we rely to comply with these regulations may require us to stop and/or repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. There is no guarantee that any such CROs, clinical trial investigators or other third parties on which we rely will devote adequate time and resources to our development activities or perform as contractually required. In addition, these third parties may be subject to supply chain or inflationary pressures that limit their ability to achieve anticipated timelines or result in a greater cost to us. For example, we are aware of recurrent shortages of non-human primates available for preclinical studies and although that is not expected to impact our current business, if we begin new product development programs we could be subject to longer development times or difficulty completing necessary research. If any of these third parties fail to meet expected deadlines, adhere to our clinical protocols or meet regulatory requirements, otherwise perform in a substandard manner, or terminate their engagements with us, the timelines for our development programs may be extended or delayed or our development activities may be suspended or terminated. If our clinical trial site terminates for any reason, we may experience the loss of follow-up information on subjects enrolled in such clinical trial unless we are able to transfer those subjects to another qualified clinical trial site, which may be difficult or impossible. In addition, with respect to investigator-sponsored trials that may be conducted, we would not control the design or conduct of these trials, and it is possible that the FDA will not view these investigator-sponsored trials as providing adequate support for future clinical trials or market approval, whether controlled by us or third parties, for any one or more reasons, including elements of the design or execution of the trials or safety concerns or other trial results. We expect that such arrangements will provide us certain information rights with respect to the investigator-sponsored trials, including access to and the ability to use and reference the data, including for our own regulatory submissions, resulting from the investigator sponsored trials. However, we would not have control over the timing and reporting of the data from investigator-sponsored trials, nor would we own the data from the investigator-sponsored trials. If we are unable to confirm or replicate the results from the investigator- sponsored trials or if negative results are obtained, we would likely be further delayed or prevented from advancing further clinical development. Further, if investigators or institutions breach their obligations with respect to the clinical development of our product candidates, or if the data proves to be inadequate compared to the firsthand knowledge we might have gained had the investigator-sponsored trials been sponsored and conducted by us, then our ability to design and conduct any future clinical trials ourselves may be adversely affected. The investigators may design clinical trials with clinical endpoints that are more difficult to achieve, or in other ways that increase the risk of negative clinical trial results compared to clinical trials that we may design on our own. Negative results in investigator-sponsored clinical trials could have a material adverse effect on our efforts to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates and the public perception of our product candidates. Additionally, the FDA may disagree with the sufficiency of our right of reference to the preclinical, manufacturing or clinical data generated by these investigator-sponsored trials, or our interpretation of preclinical, manufacturing or clinical data from these investigator-sponsored trials. If so, the FDA may require us to obtain and submit additional preclinical, manufacturing, or clinical data. 80 Furthermore, these third parties may also have relationships with other entities, some of which may be our competitors for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other pharmaceutical product development activities that could harm our competitive position. If these third parties do not successfully carry out their contractual duties, meet expected deadlines or conduct our clinical trials in accordance with regulatory requirements or our stated protocols, we will not be able to obtain, or may be delayed in obtaining, regulatory approval for BGE-102 or any future product candidates and will not be able to, or may be delayed in our efforts to, successfully commercialize our products. The manufacture of pharmaceutical products, including BGE-102 and any future product candidates is complex. Our third-party manufacturers may encounter difficulties in production, which could delay or entirely halt their ability in the future to supply our product candidates for clinical trials or, if approved, for commercial sale. We do not have any manufacturing facilities, and we currently contract with certain third-party manufacturers, which are located in China and India. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and related raw materials for preclinical and clinical testing, product development purposes, to support regulatory application submissions, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates obtain regulatory approval. In addition, we expect to contract with analytical laboratories for release and stability testing of our product candidates. This reliance on third parties increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products or such quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts and cause the FDA to withdraw certain designations, including orphan drug designation. For example, we cannot be sure to what extent the supply chain issues caused by geopolitical uncertainty, including the armed conflict between the U.S. military and Iran and related disruption in the region, the impacts of threatened or imposed tariffs or other trade barriers, and public health epidemics, may impact our ability to procure sufficient supplies for the development of our product candidates and what, if any, impact that may have on our facilities and operations in the region, including but not limited to a decrease or disruption of production, increased costs of production or other interruptions in our supply chain. In addition, any disruption in production or inability of our manufacturers, specifically in China, to produce adequate quantities to meet our needs, whether as a result of a natural disaster, regulatory restrictions or other causes, could impair our ability to operate our business on a day-to-day basis and to continue our development of our product candidates. Furthermore, since some of our third-party manufacturers are located in China and India, we are exposed to the possibility of product supply disruption and increased costs in the event of changes in the policies of the United States, such as the recent imposition of tariffs, or other trade barriers, or actions by the Chinese governments, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in China. In addition, certain Chinese biotechnology companies may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or proposed legislation by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such entities, thereby potentially disrupting the supply of material to us. For example, the BIOSECURE Act, signed into law in December 2025, prohibits U.S. federal agencies from entering into or renewing any contract (or loaning or granting funds to do the same) with any entity that uses “biotechnology equipment or services” produced or provided by a “biotechnology company of concern” to perform that contract. A “biotechnology company of concern” is defined as an entity that is involved in the manufacturing, distribution, provision, or procurement of a biotechnology equipment or service and is (i) identified on the annual 1260H List of Chinese military companies (1260H List) issued by the U.S. Department of Defense, (ii) determined by the U.S. government to meet certain criteria relating to national security and control by a foreign adversary through a process set forth in the Act, or (iii) certain affiliates of the foregoing. In addition, the BIOSECURE Act provides a grandfathering period of five years for entities that are designated by the U.S. Government; however, entities identified on the 1260H List are not eligible for such grandfathering period. We are presently party to agreements with WuXi Apptec and its affiliates (WuXi), pursuant to which WuXi provides development and manufacturing services to us. WuXi is not currently designated on the 1260H List and has not otherwise been determined to be a biotechnology company of concern, but could be designated as such by the U.S. government in an annual update to the 1260H List or through the process set forth in the Act, once established. If this law or similar laws that may be passed impact WuXi or other Chinese biotechnology manufacturing companies that we may contract with or that provide biotechnology equipment or services in the manufacture of our products or product candidates, they would have the potential to severely restrict our ability to work with WuXi and other such Chinese biotechnology manufacturing companies to the extent we would contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. We cannot predict what actions may ultimately be taken with respect to trade relations between the United States and China or other countries, what products and services may be subject to such actions or what actions may be taken by China or the other countries in retaliation. Setting up alternative manufacturing or supplier relationships in other jurisdictions would result in additional costs to the business and will require the time and attention of management. Any of these matters could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations. In addition, disruptions in logistics routes and transportation capabilities could disrupt our supply chain. And, if we experience unexpected spikes in demand over time, we risk running out of our necessary supplies. 81 We may be unable to enter into additional agreements with third-party manufacturers or suppliers on favorable terms. Our anticipated reliance on a limited number of third party-manufacturers or suppliers exposes us to the following risks: • reliance on the third party for regulatory, compliance and quality assurance; • reliance on the third party for product development, analytical testing and data generation to support regulatory applications; • operations of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers could be disrupted by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy of the manufacturer or supplier, the issuance of an FDA Form 483 notice or warning letter or other enforcement action by the FDA or other regulatory authority; • the possible breach of the manufacturing agreement by the third party; • the possible misappropriation of our proprietary information, including our trade secrets and know-how; • the possible termination or nonrenewal of the agreement by the third party at a time that is costly or inconvenient for us; • carrier disruptions or increased costs that are beyond our control; and • failure to deliver our drugs under specified storage conditions and in a timely manner. Third-party manufacturers may not be able to comply with cGMP regulations or similar regulatory requirements outside of the United States. If the FDA determines that our CDMOs are not in compliance with FDA laws and regulations, including those governing cGMPs, the FDA may not approve a new drug application until the deficiencies are corrected or we replace the manufacturer in our application with a manufacturer that is in compliance. Moreover, our failure, or the failure of our third-party manufacturers and suppliers, to comply with applicable regulations could result in sanctions being imposed on us, including clinical holds, fines, injunctions, civil penalties, seizures or recalls of product candidates or products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecutions, any of which could significantly and adversely affect supplies of our products. In addition, approved products and the facilities at which they are manufactured are required to maintain ongoing compliance with extensive FDA requirements and the requirements of other similar agencies, including ensuring that quality control and manufacturing procedures conform to cGMP requirements. As such, our CDMOs are subject to continual review and periodic inspections to assess compliance with cGMPs. Furthermore, although we do not have day-to-day control over the operations of our CDMOs, we are responsible for ensuring compliance with applicable laws and regulations, including cGMPs. Our product candidates and any products that we may develop may compete with other product candidates and products for access to manufacturing facilities. As a result, we may not obtain access to these facilities on a priority basis or at all. There are a limited number of manufacturers that operate under cGMP regulations and that might be capable of manufacturing for us. As we prepare for later-stage clinical trials and potential commercialization, we will need to take steps to increase the scale of production of our product candidates. We have not yet scaled up the manufacturing process for any of our product candidates and may need to scale further to support future supply needs for any of our product candidates. Third-party manufacturers may be unable to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any of our product candidates in a timely or cost-effective manner, or at all. In addition, quality issues may arise during scale-up or commercial activities. For example, if microbial, viral or other contaminations are discovered in our product candidates or in the manufacturing facilities in which our product candidates are made, such manufacturing facilities may need to be closed for an extended period of time to investigate and remedy the contamination. Any performance failure on the part of our existing or future manufacturers could delay clinical development or regulatory approval. If our current CDMOs cannot perform as agreed, we may be required to replace such CDMOs. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture our product candidates, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying any such replacement manufacturer or be able to reach agreement with any alternative manufacturer. In this case, our clinical trials supply could be delayed significantly as we establish alternative supply sources. In addition, if we are required to change CDMOs for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new CDMO maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations. We will also need to verify, such as through a manufacturing comparability study, that any new manufacturing process will produce our product candidate according to the specifications previously submitted to the FDA or another regulatory authority. The delays associated with the verification of a new CDMO could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates or commercialize our products in a timely manner or within budget. In addition, changes in manufacturers often involve changes in manufacturing procedures and processes, which could require that we conduct bridging studies between our prior clinical supply used in our clinical trials and that of any new manufacturer. We may be unsuccessful in demonstrating the comparability 82 of clinical supplies, which could require the conduct of additional clinical trials. Further, our third- party manufacturers may experience manufacturing or shipping difficulties due to resource constraints or as a result of natural disasters, labor disputes, unstable political environments or public health epidemics. Our current and anticipated future dependence upon others for the manufacture of our product candidates or products may adversely affect our future profit margins and our ability to commercialize any products that obtain regulatory approval on a timely and competitive basis. If we, or any contract manufacturers or 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 harm our business. We and our third-party contractors are subject to numerous federal, state, local and foreign 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. We could also be held liable for unexpected safety events that could happen in our business offices. In addition, our leasing and operation of real property may subject us to liability pursuant to certain of these laws or regulations. Under existing United States environmental laws and regulations, current or previous owners or operators of real property and entities that disposed or arranged for the disposal of hazardous substances may be held strictly, jointly and severally liable for the cost of investigating or remediating contamination caused by hazardous substance releases, even if they did not know of and were not responsible for the releases. We could incur significant costs and liabilities which may adversely affect our financial condition and operating results for failure to comply with such 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. Although we maintain liability insurance to cover us for costs and expenses we may incur due to injuries to our employees, 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 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. Risks Related to Intellectual Property If we do not obtain patent term extension for any product candidates we may develop, our business may be harmed. Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of any FDA regulatory approval of BGE-102 and any other product candidates we may develop and our technology, our U.S. patents or one or more U.S. patents that may issue in the future based on a patent application that we license or own may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Amendments. 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 remaining term of a patent beyond 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. 83 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 time period 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, our competitors may obtain approval of competing products following our patent expiration, and our revenue could be reduced. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Patent terms may be insufficient to protect our competitive position on BGE-102 and any future product candidates for an adequate amount of time. Patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various patent term adjustments or extensions may be available, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering BGE-102 or any future product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generics. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing products identical or similar to ours. Obtaining and maintaining our patent protection is dependent on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated for non-compliance with these requirements. Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other governmental fees on patents and/or applications will be due to be paid to the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO) and various governmental patent agencies outside of the United States in several stages over the lifetime of the patents and/or applications. We have systems in place to remind us to pay these fees, and we employ an outside firm and/or rely on our outside counsel to pay these fees due to the USPTO and non-U.S. governmental patent agencies. The USPTO and various non-U.S. governmental patent agencies require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar provisions during the patent application process. We employ reputable law firms and other professionals to help us comply, and in many cases, an inadvertent lapse can be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules. However, there are situations in which 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. In such an event, our competitors might be able to enter the market and this circumstance would have a material adverse effect on our business. Changes in U.S. patent and ex-U.S. patent laws could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our current or future product candidates. Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States or in other jurisdictions could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of patent applications and the enforcement or defense of issued patents. In the United States, numerous recent changes to the patent laws and proposed changes to the rules of the USPTO may have a significant impact on our ability to protect our technology and enforce our intellectual property rights. For example, the Leahy-Smith Act includes a number of significant changes to United States patent law. These changes include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art, provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents, and enable third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent at USPTO-administered post- grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review, and derivation proceedings. Because of a lower evidentiary standard in USPTO proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. 84 Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 2013, in the United States, the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the United States, the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. After March 2013, under the Leahy-Smith Act, the United States transitioned to a first-to-file system in which, assuming that the other statutory requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. As such, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, the patent positions of companies in the development and commercialization of pharmaceuticals and biologics are particularly uncertain. Recent U.S. Supreme Court rulings have narrowed the scope of patent protection available in certain circumstances and weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. This combination of events has created uncertainty with respect to the validity and enforceability of patents once obtained. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that could have a material adverse effect on our patent rights and our ability to protect, defend and enforce our patent rights in the future. For example, in the case, Assoc. for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., the U.S. Supreme Court held that claims to certain DNA molecules are not patentable. In Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, the Federal Circuit held that claims with functional language may face high hurdles in fulfilling the enablement requirement. Recent decisions raise questions regarding the award of patent term adjustment (PTA) for patents where related patents have been issued without a PTA. Thus, it cannot be said with certainty how PTA will or will not be viewed in future and whether patent expiration dates may be impacted. We cannot predict how this and future decisions by the courts, the U.S. Congress or the USPTO may impact the value of our patents. Any similar adverse changes in the patent laws of other jurisdictions could also have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Furthermore, 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. 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, infringed, circumvented or declared generic or descriptive or determined to be infringing on other marks. We may not be able to protect our rights to these trademarks and trade names or may be forced to stop using these names, which we need for name recognition by potential partners or customers in our markets of interest. During trademark registration proceedings, we may receive rejections of our applications by the USPTO or in other 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 foreign 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. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may not be able to compete effectively and our business may be adversely affected. We may license our trademarks and trade names to third parties, such as distributors. Although these license agreements may provide guidelines for how our trademarks and trade names may be used, a breach of these agreements or misuse of our trademarks and tradenames by our licensees may jeopardize our rights in or diminish the goodwill associated with our trademarks and trade names. Moreover, any name we have proposed to use with our therapeutic candidate 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. Similar requirements exist in Europe. 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, it 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 85 be acceptable to the FDA. Furthermore, in many countries, 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. 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. If we assert trademark infringement claims, a court may determine that the marks we have asserted are invalid or unenforceable, or that the party against whom we have asserted trademark infringement has superior rights to the marks in question. In this case, we could ultimately be forced to cease use of such trademarks. Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address 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 or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example: • others may be able to develop products that are similar to our product candidates but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or license; • we or our licensors or collaborators might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patents or patent application that we own or license; • we or our licensors or collaborators might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our inventions; • others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our intellectual property rights; • it is possible that the pending patent applications we own or license will not lead to issued patents; • issued patents that we own or license may be held invalid or unenforceable, as a result of legal challenges by our competitors; • our competitors might conduct research and development activities in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets; • we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable; • the patents of others may have an adverse effect on our business; • we may fail to adequately protect and police our trademarks and trade secrets; and • we may choose not to file a patent in order to maintain certain trade secrets or know-how, and a third party may subsequently file a patent covering such intellectual property. Should any of these events occur, it could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Our rights to develop and commercialize any future products as well as our lead product candidate, BGE-102, are or may be subject to the terms and conditions of license agreements. We have in the past licensed, and may in future license, certain patent rights and proprietary technology from third parties that are important or necessary to the development of our product candidates. Out-license agreements we may enter into in the future may include exclusivity terms limiting our ability to develop product candidates that may compete with the relevant licensed target or product. If such exclusivity restrictions prevent us from developing or commercializing our technologies in a way that we deem necessary to gain or maintain our competitive advantage, it may have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects. 86 We may not have complete control in the preparation, filing, prosecution, maintenance, enforcement and defense of patents and patent applications covering the technology that we license from third parties. It is possible that our licensors’ enforcement of patents against infringers or defense of such patents against challenges of validity or claims of enforceability may be less vigorous than if we had conducted them ourselves, or may not be conducted in accordance with our best interests. 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 licensors fail to prosecute, maintain, enforce and defend such patents, or lose rights to those patents or patent applications, the rights we have licensed may be reduced or eliminated, our right to develop and commercialize any of our product candidates we may develop that are the subject of such licensed rights could be adversely affected and we may not be able to prevent competitors from making, using and selling competing products. Our licensors may have relied on third-party consultants or collaborators or on funds from third parties such that our licensors are not the sole and exclusive owners of the patents we in-licensed. If other third parties have ownership rights to our in-licensed patents, the license granted to us in jurisdictions where the consent of a co-owner is necessary to grant such a license may not be valid and such co-owners may be able to license such patents to our competitors, and our competitors could market competing products and technology. In addition, our rights to our in-licensed patents and patent applications are dependent, in part, on inter-institutional or other operating agreements between the joint owners of such in-licensed patents and patent applications. If one or more of such joint owners breaches such inter-institutional or operating agreements, our rights to such in-licensed patents and patent applications may be adversely affected. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our competitive position, business, financial conditions, results of operations and prospects. If we breach our license agreements it could have a material adverse effect on our commercialization efforts for BGE-102 or any future product candidates. We have in the past and may in the future enter into license agreements with third parties under which we license the use, development and commercialization rights to current or future product candidates or technology from third parties. These intellectual property license agreements may require us to comply with various obligations, including diligence obligations such as development and commercialization obligations, as well as potential royalty and milestone payments and other obligations. If we fail to comply with our obligations under any of these license agreements, use the licensed intellectual property in an unauthorized manner, we are subject to bankruptcy- related proceedings or otherwise materially breach any of these license agreements, the terms of the license granted may be materially modified, such as by rendering currently exclusive licenses non-exclusive, or it may give our licensors the right to terminate the applicable license agreement, in whole or in part. Generally, the loss of or termination of our rights under any licenses we may acquire in the future, could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may also, in the future, enter into license agreements with third parties under which we are a sublicensee. If our sublicenseor fails to comply with its obligations under its upstream license agreement with its licensor, the licensor may have the right to terminate the upstream license, which may result in termination of our sublicense. If this were to occur, we would no longer have rights to the applicable intellectual property unless we are able to secure our own direct license with the owner of the relevant rights, which we may not be able to do on reasonable terms, or at all, which may impact our ability to continue to develop and commercialize product candidates incorporating the relevant intellectual property. Licensing of intellectual property is of critical importance to our business and involves complex legal, business and scientific issues. Disputes may arise between us and our licensors regarding intellectual property subject to a license agreement, including: • the scope of rights granted under a license agreement and other interpretation-related issues; • 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 patent and other intellectual property rights to third parties under collaborative development relationships; • our diligence obligations with respect to the use of the licensed technology in relation to our development and commercialization product candidates, and what activities satisfy those diligence obligations; • the calculation of total payment amount due if we develop multiple products under the license agreement(s); • our right to transfer or assign the license; 87 • the ownership of inventions and know-how resulting from the joint creation or use of intellectual property by our licensors and us and our partners; and • whether and the extent to which inventors are able to contest the assignment of their rights to our licensors. If disputes over intellectual property that we have licensed or license in the future prevent or impair our ability to maintain our current licensing arrangements on acceptable terms or at all, we may be unable to successfully develop and commercialize the affected product candidates, which could have material adverse effect on our business. In addition, if disputes arise as to ownership of licensed intellectual property, our ability to pursue or enforce the licensed patent rights may be jeopardized. If we or our licensors fail to adequately protect this intellectual property, our ability to commercialize our products could suffer. Further, certain of our future license agreements with third parties may limit or delay our ability to consummate certain transactions, may impact the value of those transactions or may limit our ability to pursue certain activities (e.g., we may in the future enter into license agreements that are not assignable or transferable, or that require the licensor’s express consent in order for an assignment or transfer to take place). Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement may prevent or delay our product discovery and development efforts. Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of litigation involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including interference, derivation, inter partes review, post grant review, and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. We may be exposed to, or threatened with, future litigation by third parties having patent or other intellectual property rights alleging that our product candidates and/or proprietary technologies infringe their intellectual property rights. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications, which are owned by third parties, exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. There may be third-party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to our product candidates and programs. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, the risk increases that our product candidates may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. Moreover, it is not always clear to industry participants, including us, which patents cover various types of drugs, products or their methods of use or manufacture that may be relevant to our product candidates. Thus, because of the large number of patents issued and patent applications filed in our fields, there may be a risk that third parties may allege they have patent rights encompassing our future product candidates, technologies or methods. If any such patent were to be asserted against us, we may have defenses against any such action, including that these patents would not be infringed by our future product candidates and/or that these patents are not valid. However, if these patents were asserted against us and our defenses to such an action were unsuccessful, unless we obtain a license to these patents, which may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, we could be liable for damages and precluded from commercializing any future product candidates, which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, cash flows or results of operations. If a third-party claims that we infringe its intellectual property rights, we may face a number of issues, including, but not limited to: • infringement and other intellectual property claims which, regardless of merit, may be expensive and time-consuming to litigate and may divert our management’s attention from our core business; • substantial damages for infringement, which we may have to pay if a court decides that the product candidate or technology at issue infringes on or violates the third party’s rights, and, if the court finds that the infringement was willful, we could be ordered to pay treble damages and the patent owner’s attorneys’ fees; • a court prohibiting us from developing, manufacturing, marketing or selling our product candidates, or from using our proprietary technologies, unless the third party licenses its product rights to us, which it is not required to do; • if a license is available from a third party, we may have to pay substantial royalties, upfront fees and other amounts, and/or grant cross-licenses to intellectual property rights for our products, if any; and • redesigning our product candidates or processes so they do not infringe, which may not be possible or may require substantial monetary expenditures and time. 88 Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our operations or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. Third parties may assert that we are employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Generally, conducting clinical trials and other development activities in the United States is protected under the Safe Harbor exemption as set forth in 35 U.S.C. § 271. If and when BGE-102 or any future product candidate is approved by the FDA, a certain third party may then seek to enforce its patent by filing a patent infringement lawsuit against us. While we do not believe that any claims of such patent that could otherwise materially adversely affect commercialization of our product candidates, if approved, are valid and enforceable, we may be incorrect in this belief, or we may not be able to prove it in a litigation. In this regard, patents issued in the United States by law enjoy a presumption of validity that can be rebutted only with evidence that is “clear and convincing,” a heightened standard of proof. There may be third-party patents of which we are currently unaware with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates may infringe. In addition, third parties may obtain patents in the future and claim that use of our technologies infringes upon these patents. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover the manufacturing process of our product candidates, molecules used in or formed during the manufacturing process, or the product candidate itself, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire or they are finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. Similarly, if any third-party patent were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover aspects of our formulations, manufacturing process or methods of use, the holders of any such patent may be able to block our ability to develop and commercialize the product candidate unless we obtained a license or until such patent expires or is finally determined to be held invalid or unenforceable. In either case, such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, our ability to commercialize our product candidates may be impaired or delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. Even if we obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. 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 any future product candidates. Parties making claims against us may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our infringing products, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. Even if such a license is available, it may be non-exclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. Furthermore, even in the absence of litigation, we may need to obtain licenses from third parties to advance our research or allow commercialization of our product candidates. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we would be unable to further develop and commercialize our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. Lastly, we may need to indemnify our customers and distributors against claims relating to the infringement of intellectual property rights of third parties related to our current and future product candidates, including BGE-102. Third parties may assert infringement claims against our customers or distributors. These claims may require us to initiate or defend protracted and costly litigation on behalf of our customers or distributors, regardless of the merits of these claims. If any of these claims succeed, we may be forced to pay damages on behalf of our customers, suppliers or distributors, or may be required to obtain licenses for the product candidates or services they use. If we cannot obtain all necessary licenses on commercially reasonable terms, our customers may be forced to stop using our products, if approved, or services. We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world. Although we have pending patent applications in the United States and other countries, filing, prosecuting, maintaining, enforcing and defending patents in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the United States can be less extensive than those in the United States. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the United States. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries outside 89 the United States or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in and into the United States or other jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection to develop their own products and, further, may export otherwise infringing products to territories where we have patent protection, but enforcement is not as strong as that in the United States. These products may compete with our product candidates, and our patents, the patents of our licensors, or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of many foreign countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property protection, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement of our patents or our licensors’ patents or marketing of competing products in violation of our proprietary rights. Proceedings to enforce our patent rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents or the patents of our licensors at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications or the patent applications of our licensors at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license. Many countries have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In these countries, the patent owner may have limited remedies, which could materially diminish the value of such patent. If we are forced to grant a license to third parties with respect to any patents relevant to our business, our competitive position may be impaired, and our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects may be adversely affected. If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed. In addition to patent protection, we rely on the protection of our trade secrets, including unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information to maintain our competitive position. Although we have taken steps to protect our trade secrets and unpatented know-how, including entering into confidentiality agreements with third parties, and confidential information and inventions agreements with employees, consultants and advisors, we cannot provide any assurances that all such agreements have been duly executed, and 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. In addition, some courts inside and outside the United States are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. Moreover, third parties may still obtain this information or may come upon this or similar information independently, and we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of these events occurs or if we otherwise lose protection for our trade secrets, the value of this information may be greatly reduced, and our competitive position would be harmed. If we do not apply for patent protection prior to such publication or if we cannot otherwise maintain the confidentiality of our proprietary technology and other confidential information, then our ability to obtain patent protection or to protect our trade secret information may be jeopardized. Third-party claims of intellectual property infringement, misappropriation or other violations against us or our collaborators could be expensive and time consuming and may prevent or delay the development and commercialization of our product candidates. Our commercial success depends in part on our ability to avoid infringing, misappropriating and otherwise violating the patents and other intellectual property rights of third parties. There is a substantial amount of complex litigation involving patents and other intellectual property rights in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries, as well as administrative proceedings for challenging patents, including interference, derivation and reexamination proceedings before the USPTO or oppositions and other comparable proceedings in foreign jurisdictions. 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 products and techniques without payment, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology. As discussed above, recently, due to changes in U.S. law referred to as patent reform, new procedures including inter partes review and post-grant review have also been implemented. As stated above, this reform adds uncertainty to the possibility of challenge to our patent rights in the future. 90 Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we may plan to commercialize BGE-102 or any future product candidates. As the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries expand and more patents are issued, and as we gain greater visibility and market exposure as a public company, the risk increases that BGE-102 or any future product candidates, and commercializing activities may give rise to claims of infringement of the patent rights of others. We cannot assure you that BGE-102 or any future product candidates will not infringe existing or future patents owned by third parties. We may not be aware of patents that have already been issued for which a third party, such as a competitor in the fields in which we are developing BGE-102 or any future product candidates, might accuse us of infringing. It is also possible that patents owned by third parties of which we are aware, but which we do not believe we infringe or that we believe we have valid defenses to any claims of patent infringement, could be found to be infringed by us. It is not unusual that corresponding patents issued in different countries have different scopes of coverage, such that in one country a third-party patent does not pose a material risk, but in another country, the corresponding third-party patent may pose a material risk to BGE-102 and any future product candidates. As such, we monitor third-party patents in the relevant pharmaceutical markets. 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 we may infringe. In the event that any third-party claims that we infringe their patents or that we are otherwise employing their proprietary technology without authorization and initiates litigation against us, even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that such patents are valid, enforceable and infringed by us. Defense of infringement claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of management and other employee resources from our business, and may impact our reputation. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may be enjoined from further developing or commercializing the infringing products or technologies. In addition, we may be required to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties and/or redesign our infringing products or technologies, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license, the license would likely obligate us to pay license fees or royalties or both, and the rights granted to us might be nonexclusive, which could result in our competitors gaining access to the same intellectual property. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license to a third-party patent on commercially reasonable terms or at all, we may be unable to commercialize the infringing products or technologies or such commercialization efforts may be significantly delayed, which could in turn significantly harm our business. In addition, we may in the future pursue patent challenges with respect to third-party patents, including as a defense against the foregoing infringement claims. The outcome of such challenges is unpredictable. Even if resolved in our favor, the foregoing proceedings could be very expensive, particularly for a company of our size, and time-consuming. Such 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 proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of litigation or administrative proceedings more effectively than we can because of greater financial resources. Such proceedings may also absorb significant time of our technical and management personnel and distract them from their normal responsibilities. Uncertainties resulting from such proceedings could impair our ability to compete in the marketplace. 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. The occurrence of any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition or results of operations. We may be subject to claims challenging the inventorship of our patents and other intellectual property. We or our licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, consultants, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our patent rights, any potential trade secrets, or other intellectual property as an inventor, co-inventor or owner of any potential trade secrets. For example, we may have inventorship disputes arise from conflicting obligations of consultants or others who are involved in developing our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these and other claims challenging inventorship or our patent rights, any potential trade secrets or other intellectual property. If we or our licensors fail in defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or right to use, intellectual property that is important to our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop. Even if we are successful in defending against such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to our management and other employees. Any of the foregoing could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 91 Third party claims or litigation alleging infringement of patents or other proprietary rights, or seeking to invalidate our patents or other proprietary rights, may delay or prevent the development and commercialization of our current or future product candidates or technologies. Our commercial success depends in part on our avoiding infringement and other violations of the patents and proprietary rights of third parties. The intellectual property landscape around obesity and cardiometabolic diseases drug development is highly dynamic and there is a substantial amount of litigation, both within and outside the United States, involving patent and other intellectual property rights in the biopharmaceutical industry. Potential litigation could include patent infringement lawsuits, derivation and administrative law proceedings, inter partes review and post-grant review before the USPTO, as well as oppositions and similar processes in foreign jurisdictions. As the fields of treating obesity and cardiometabolic diseases continue to expand and more patents are issued, and as we gain greater visibility and market exposure as a public company, the risk increases that our product candidates or other business activities may be subject to claims of infringement of the patent and other proprietary rights of third parties. Third parties may assert that we are infringing their patents or employing their proprietary technology without authorization. Also, there may be third party patents or patent applications with claims to materials, formulations, methods of manufacture or methods for treatment related to the use or manufacture of our product candidates. Because patent applications can take many years to issue, there may be currently pending patent applications which may later result in issued patents that our product candidates or technologies may infringe. Defense of third-party claims of patent infringement or violation of intellectual property rights involves substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of management and employee time and resources from our business. Some third parties may be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation more effectively than we can because they have substantially greater resources. In addition, any uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of any litigation could have a material adverse effect on our ability to raise funds necessary to continue our operations or could otherwise have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. There could also 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. Any of the foregoing events could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, third parties may obtain patent rights in the future and claim that use of our product candidates or other technologies infringe upon these rights. If any third-party patents were held by a court of competent jurisdiction to cover our product candidates, or any aspect of their manufacture or use, the holders of any such patents may be able to block our ability to commercialize such product candidate or technology unless we obtain a license under the applicable patents, or until such patents expire. Such a license may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all. In addition, we may be subject to claims that we are infringing other intellectual property rights, such as trademarks or copyrights, or misappropriating the trade secrets of others, and to the extent that our employees, consultants or contractors use intellectual property or proprietary information owned by others in their work for us, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. Parties making claims against us may seek and obtain injunctive or other equitable relief, which could effectively block our ability to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates. Defense of these claims, regardless of their merit, would involve substantial litigation expense and would be a substantial diversion of employee resources from our business. In the event of a successful infringement or other intellectual property claim against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, obtain one or more licenses from third parties, pay royalties or redesign our affected products or technologies, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. We cannot predict whether any such license would be available at all or whether it would be available on commercially reasonable terms. The scope of a patent claim is a legal determination made by the courts. It is informed by the written disclosure of a patent, the patent’s prosecution history, and other intrinsic and extrinsic factors. Our interpretation of a patent claim may not be adopted during a patent litigation alleging infringement by our products. If a court does not adopt our claim interpretation and determines that our product candidates are covered by a third-party patent, we may be held liable for damages. Similarly, we may incorrectly predict whether a third-party patent application will issue with claims that cover one or more of our product candidates. If our claim interpretations are not adopted by the USPTO during prosecution of a third-party patent application, or by a court in a patent infringement dispute, our ability to develop and market our product candidates may be harmed. 92 Moreover, we, or one of our licensors, may have to participate in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. If we or our licensors are unsuccessful in any validity (including any patent oppositions) or inventorship disputes to which we or they are subject, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights through the loss of one or more of our owned, licensed or optioned patents, or such patent claims may be narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, or through loss of exclusive ownership of or the exclusive right to use our owned or in-licensed patents. In the event of loss of patent rights as a result of any of these disputes, we may be required to obtain licenses from third parties, including parties involved in any such proceedings. If we are unable to obtain such licenses, we may need to cease the development, manufacture and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates or technologies we may develop. The loss of exclusivity or the narrowing of our patent claims could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and product candidates. Even if we or our licensors are successful in such a proceeding, it could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Furthermore, the patent landscape is crowded and highly competitive. Numerous third-party United States and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications exist in the fields in which we are developing product candidates, and they may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. Ongoing research and development is taking place by several companies, universities, and other institutions. There can be no assurance that our operations do not, or will not in the future, infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate existing or future third-party patents or other intellectual property rights. Identification of third-party patent rights that may be relevant to our operations is difficult because patent searching is imperfect due to differences in terminology among patents, incomplete databases, and publication timelines. We cannot guarantee that any patent searches we may conduct are complete or thorough enough to identify every third-party patent and pending application in the United States and/or abroad that is relevant to or necessary for the development and commercialization of our product candidates in any country. We may fail to obtain any of these licenses at a reasonable cost or on reasonable terms, if at all. In that event, we may be unable to further develop and commercialize one or more of our product candidates, which could harm our business significantly. We cannot provide any assurances that third party patents do not exist which might be enforced against our product candidates resulting in either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties or other forms of compensation to third parties. If we are unable to obtain and maintain patent protection or other necessary rights of our current or future product candidates and technology, or if the scope of the patent protection obtained is not sufficiently broad or our rights under our patents (owned, co-owned or licensed) is not sufficiently broad, our competitors could develop and commercialize products and technology similar or identical to ours, and our ability to successfully commercialize our products and technology may be adversely affected. Our success is dependent in part on our ability to obtain and maintain proprietary or intellectual property protection in the United States and other countries for our current product candidates or any future product candidates, as well as our core technologies, including our manufacturing know-how. We strive to protect and enhance the proprietary technology, inventions and improvements that are commercially important to the development of our business by seeking, maintaining and defending our intellectual property, whether developed internally or licensed from third parties. We also rely on trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop, strengthen and maintain our proprietary position in obesity and cardiometabolic disease drug development. Additionally, we intend to utilize regulatory protection afforded through rare drug designations, data exclusivity and market exclusivity as well as patent term extensions, where available. The patent position of biotechnology and biopharmaceutical companies generally is highly uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions, and has in recent years been the subject of much litigation. The degree of patent protection we require to successfully compete in the marketplace may be unavailable or severely limited in some cases and may not adequately protect our rights or permit us to gain or keep any competitive advantage. We cannot provide any assurances that any of our own or licensed patent applications will mature into issued patents, and cannot provide any assurances that any such patents, if issued, will include claims with a scope sufficient to protect our current and future product candidates or otherwise provide any competitive advantage. Additionally, patents can be enforced only in those jurisdictions in which the patent has issued. Furthermore, patents have a limited lifespan. In the United States, the natural expiration of a patent is generally twenty years after its first nonprovisional U.S. filing. The natural expiration of a patent outside of the United States varies in accordance with provisions of applicable local law, but is generally 20 years from the earliest local filing date. Various extensions may be available; however, the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. 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. 93 Our licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with adequate and continuing patent protection sufficient to exclude others from commercializing products similar to our product candidates, including generic versions of such products. In addition, the patent portfolio licensed to us is, or may be, licensed to third parties outside our licensed field, and such third parties may have certain enforcement rights. Thus, patents licensed to us could be put at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly in litigation filed by or against another licensee or in administrative proceedings brought by or against another licensee in response to such litigation or for other reasons. Other parties have developed technologies that may be related or competitive to our own and such parties may have filed or may file patent applications, or may have received or may receive patents, claiming inventions that may overlap or conflict with those claimed in our own patent applications or issued patents. Publication of discoveries in the scientific literature lags behind the actual discoveries, and patent applications in the United States and in 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 the inventors of our patents and applications were the first to make the inventions claimed in those patents or pending patent applications, or that they were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. Further, we cannot assure you that all of the potentially relevant prior art relating to our patents and patent applications has been found. If such prior art exists, it can invalidate a patent or prevent a patent from issuing from a pending patent application. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity and commercial value of our patent rights cannot be predicted with any certainty. Further, if the breadth or strength of protection provided by our patents and patent applications is threatened, regardless of the outcome, it could dissuade companies from collaborating with us to license, develop or commercialize our current or future product candidates. In addition, the patent prosecution process is expensive and time-consuming, and we or our licensors may not be able to file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. In addition, the scope of the claims initially submitted for examination may be significantly narrowed by the time they issue, if at all. It is also possible that we or our licensors will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output before it is too late to obtain patent protection. We cannot provide any assurances that we will be able to pursue or obtain additional patent protection based on our research and development efforts, or that any such patents or other intellectual property we generate will provide any competitive advantage. Even if we acquire patent protection that we expect should enable us to maintain competitive advantage, the issuance of a patent is not conclusive as to its inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability. Third parties, including former employees, consultants, collaborators and competitors, may challenge the inventorship, scope, validity, or enforceability thereof, which may result in such patents being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable. If issued, our patents may be challenged in patent offices in the United States and abroad, or in court. For example, we may be subject to a third party submission of prior art to the USPTO challenging the validity of one or more claims of our patents, once issued. Such submissions may also be made prior to a patent’s issuance, precluding the granting of a patent based on one of our patent applications. We may become involved in opposition, reexamination, inter partes review, post-grant review, derivation, interference, or similar proceedings in the United States or abroad challenging the claims of our patents, once issued. Furthermore, patents may be challenged in court, once issued. Competitors may claim that they invented the inventions claimed in such patents or patent applications, or may have filed patent applications before the inventors of our patents did. A competitor may also claim that we are infringing its patents and that we therefore cannot practice our technology as claimed under our patent applications and patents, if issued. As a result, one or more claims of our patents may be narrowed or invalidated. In litigation, a competitor could claim that our patents, if issued, are not valid for a number of reasons. If a court agrees, we would lose our rights to those challenged patents. Even if they are unchallenged, our patents and pending patent applications, if issued, may not provide us with any meaningful protection or prevent competitors from designing around our patent claims to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or therapeutics in a non-infringing manner. For example, even if we have a valid and enforceable patent, we may not be able to exclude others from practicing our invention if the other party can show that they used the invention in commerce before our filing date or the other party benefits from a compulsory license. If the patent protection provided by the patents and patent applications we hold or pursue with respect to our product candidates is not sufficiently broad to impede such competition, our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates could be negatively affected, which would harm our business. Certain regulatory exclusivities may be available, however, the scope of such regulatory exclusivities is subject to change, and may not provide us with adequate and continuing protection sufficient to exclude others from commercializing products similar to our product candidates. 94 Risks Related to Government Regulation Disruptions at the FDA, the SEC and other government agencies or comparable regulatory authorities caused by, among other factors, funding shortages or global health concerns could occur at any time. In addition, there is substantial uncertainty regarding new initiatives under the new Administration and how these might impact the FDA, its implementation of laws, regulations, policies, and guidance, and its personnel. Similar initiatives may also be directed towards other agencies. These disruptions could hinder government agencies' ability to hire, retain or deploy key leadership and other personnel, otherwise prevent new products and services 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 our business may rely, which could negatively impact our business. The ability of the FDA or other 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 comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of the SEC, and other government agencies or comparable foreign regulatory authorities on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA or other regulatory authorities may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved, which would adversely affect our business. For example, starting in January 2025, the current Administration has reduced the number of federal employees, including at FDA, by establishing voluntary termination programs, by position eliminations or by involuntary terminations. Changes in FDA staffing could result in 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. Similar consequences may also occur as a result of a significant shutdown of the federal government. For example, over the last several years, and most recently in late 2025, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA and the SEC, had to furlough critical employees and stop critical activities. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if geopolitical or global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews, or other regulatory activities, or if the volume of applications to the FDA for new product candidates increases materially, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business. Further, future government shutdowns could impact our ability to access the public markets and obtain necessary capital in order to properly capitalize and continue our operations. If the FDA is constrained in its ability to engage in oversight and implementation activities in the normal course, our business may be negatively impacted. In addition, FDA-regulated industries, such as ours, face substantial uncertainty in regard to the regulatory environment we will face under the current Administration as we proceed with research and development efforts and potential future commercialization. Some of these efforts have manifested to date as efforts to reduce the size of the federal government, including large-scale reductions in force at the FDA. The loss of key personnel at the FDA, including those in leadership positions, is likely to impact operations at the FDA, which could result in, among other things, delays or limitations on our ability to obtain guidance from the FDA on our product candidates in development, longer review times, and delays in obtaining the requisite regulatory approvals for our product candidates. Moreover, the current Administration paused payments by, reduced the budget of, and terminated grants provided by the National Institutes of Health (NIH) as related to its funding for medical research, which has decreased, and may continue to decrease, the ability of facilities that rely on NIH funding to enroll and conduct clinical trials or increase the costs to us of conducting clinical trials. Some of these actions have been challenged in court and there remains general uncertainty regarding future activities. The Administration could issue or promulgate executive orders, regulations, policies or guidance that adversely affect us or create a more challenging or costly environment to pursue the development of new therapeutic products. Alternatively, state governments may attempt to address or react to changes at the federal level with changes to their own regulatory frameworks in a manner that is adverse to our operations. If we become negatively impacted by future governmental orders, regulations, policies or guidance as a result of the Administration, there could be a material adverse effect on us and our business. Further, three decisions from the U.S. Supreme Court in July 2024 may lead to an increase in litigation against regulatory agencies that could create uncertainty and thus negatively impact our business. The first decision overturned established precedent that required courts to defer to regulatory agencies’ interpretations of ambiguous statutory language. The second decision overturned regulatory agencies’ ability to impose civil penalties in administrative proceedings. The third decision extended the statute of limitations within which entities may challenge agency actions. These cases may result in increased litigation by industry against regulatory agencies and impact how such agencies choose to pursue enforcement and compliance actions. However, the specific, lasting effects of these decisions, which may vary within different judicial districts and circuits, 95 is unknown. We also cannot predict the extent to which FDA and SEC regulations, policies, and decisions may become subject to increasing legal challenges, delays, and changes. Existing, recently enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain regulatory approval of and commercialize our product candidates and decrease the prices we may obtain. In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any products for which we obtain regulatory approval. Legislative and regulatory proposals have been made to expand post-approval requirements and restrict sales and promotional activities for pharmaceutical products. We cannot be sure whether additional legislative changes will be enacted, or whether the FDA regulations, guidance or interpretations will be changed, or what the impact of such changes on the regulatory approvals of our product candidates, if any, may be. In addition, increased scrutiny by the U.S. Congress of the FDA’s approval process may significantly delay or prevent regulatory approval, as well as subject us to more stringent product labeling and post-marketing testing and other requirements. In the United States, there have been and continue to be a number of legislative initiatives to contain healthcare costs, including costs of pharmaceuticals. There has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their products, which has resulted in several presidential executive orders, Congressional inquiries, and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the costs of drugs under Medicare and Medicaid, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011 imposed, subject to certain temporary suspension periods, 2% reductions in Medicare payments to providers per fiscal year starting April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2032, unless additional Congressional action is taken. In December 2020, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (CMS) issued a final rule implementing significant manufacturer price reporting changes under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, including an alternative rebate calculation for line extensions that is tied to the price increases of the original drug, and Best Price reporting related to certain value-based purchasing arrangements. Under the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, effective January 1, 2024, the statutory cap on Medicaid Drug Rebate Program rebates that manufacturers pay to state Medicaid programs is eliminated. Elimination of this cap has, in some cases, require pharmaceutical manufacturers to pay more in rebates than they receive on the sale of products. In 2024, CMS issued a final rule that decreased Medicare reimbursement for physician services by 2.8%, effective January 1, 2025. If federal spending is further reduced, anticipated budgetary shortfalls may also impact the ability of relevant agencies, such as the FDA, to continue to function at current levels. Amounts allocated to federal grants and contracts may be reduced or eliminated. These reductions may also impact the ability of relevant agencies to timely review and approve research and development, manufacturing, and marketing activities, which may delay our ability to develop, market and sell any products we may develop. Several healthcare reform initiatives culminated in the enactment of the Inflation Reduction Act (the IRA) in August 2022, which, among other things, allows the United States Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) to directly negotiate the selling price of a statutorily specified number of drugs and biologics each year that CMS reimburses under Medicare Part B and Part D. The negotiated price may not exceed a statutory ceiling price. Only high-expenditure single-source drugs that have been approved for at least 7 years (11 years for single-source biologics) are eligible to be selected for negotiation by CMS, with the negotiated price taking effect two years after the selection year. For 2026, the first year in which negotiated prices become effective, CMS selected 10 high-cost Medicare Part D products in 2023, negotiations began in 2024, and the negotiated maximum fair price for each product has been announced. In addition, CMS has selected and announced the negotiated maximum fair price for 15 additional Medicare Part D drugs, which will become effective in 2027. For 2028, CMS has selected an additional 15 drugs, comprised of drugs covered under Medicare Part D and, for the first time, drugs payable under Medicare Part B. For 2029 and subsequent years, 20 Part B or Part D drugs will be selected. The IRA also imposes rebates on Medicare Part D and Part B drugs whose prices have increased at a rate greater than the rate of inflation and in November 2024, CMS finalized regulations for these inflation rebates. In addition, the law eliminated the “donut hole” under Medicare Part D beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and requiring manufacturers to subsidize, through a newly established manufacturer discount program, 10% of Part D enrollees’ prescription costs for brand drugs below the out-of-pocket limit, and 20% once the out-of-pocket limit has been reached. The IRA permits the Secretary of HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. Manufacturers that fail to comply with the IRA may be subject to various penalties, including significant civil monetary penalties. These provisions began taking effect progressively starting in 2023 and may be subject to legal challenges. For 96 example, the provisions related to the negotiation of selling prices of high-expenditure single-source drugs and biologics have been challenged in multiple lawsuits brought by pharmaceutical manufacturers. The outcome of these lawsuits is uncertain, and some IRA drug discount provisions have not been challenged in litigation. Thus, while it is unclear how the IRA will be implemented, it will likely have a significant impact on the pharmaceutical industry and the pricing of BGE-102 or any future product candidates. The current Administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, which include the FDA and CMS, and related agencies. These actions included, for example, directives to reduce agency workforce, which include the FDA and CMS, and related agencies. In addition, on May 12, 2025, President Trump issued an Executive Order that, among other things, required HHS, within 30 days, to establish and communicate to drug manufacturers most favored nation (MFN) price targets designed to bring drug prices for American patients in line with those in comparably developed nations. If significant progress towards MFN pricing is not achieved, the Executive Order requires HHS to propose a rulemaking to implement MFN pricing. Recently, on December 23, 2025, CMS issued proposed regulations to establish, under the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation (CMMI), two mandatory MFN demonstration models under Medicare Parts B and D, respectively. Further, as part of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission’s recent Strategy Report, the administration is working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. At the state level, legislatures are increasingly enacting laws and implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological product pricing, including restrictions or prohibitions on certain marketing practices, reporting of specified categories of remuneration provided to health care practitioners, and reporting and justification of price increases greater than a specified level. In some cases, states have designed programs to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing, though the federal government has not yet approved any such plans. For example, the FDA released a final rule in 2020 providing guidance for states to build and submit importation proposals for drugs from Canada, and the FDA authorized the first such plan in Florida in 2024 but implementation of Florida’s plan has been extended. We expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for pharmaceuticals and other healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for BGE-102 or any future product candidates or additional pricing pressures. The insurance coverage and reimbursement status of newly approved products are uncertain. Failure to obtain or maintain coverage and adequate reimbursement for any future products could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue. Sales of our product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, on the extent to which such products will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health care programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. These third-party payors are increasingly limiting coverage and/or reducing reimbursements for medical products and services. A third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a drug product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Even if coverage is provided, the approved reimbursement amount may not be high enough to allow us to establish or maintain pricing sufficient to realize a sufficient return on our investment. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug product does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage for the drug product. Coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. In addition, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have continued implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our net revenue and results. There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the CMS as CMS decides whether and to what extent a new medicine will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare. Private payors often, but not always, follow CMS’s decisions regarding coverage and reimbursement. Decreases in third-party payor reimbursement or a decision by a third-party payor to not cover any of our product candidates, if approved, could reduce physician usage of our product candidates, and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Nonetheless, our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. 97 Our operations and relationships with healthcare providers, healthcare organizations, customers and third- party payors will be subject to applicable anti-bribery, anti-kickback, fraud and abuse, transparency and other healthcare laws and regulations, which could expose us to, among other things, enforcement actions, criminal sanctions, civil penalties, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens and diminished profits and future earnings. Our current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, healthcare organizations, third-party payors and customers expose us to broadly applicable anti-bribery, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, market, sell and distribute any of our product candidates, if approved. Restrictions under applicable federal and state anti-bribery and healthcare laws and regulations, include the following: • the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, individuals and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or providing remuneration, directly or indirectly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward, or in return for, either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, order or recommendation of, any good or service for which payment may be made under a federal and state healthcare program such as Medicare and Medicaid. The term remuneration has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation; • the federal criminal and civil false claims and civil monetary penalties laws, including the federal False Claims Act, which can be enforced through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions against individuals or entities, and the Federal Civil Monetary Penalties Law, which prohibit, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. In addition, certain marketing practices, including off-label promotion, may also violate false claims laws. Moreover, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act; • HIPAA and its implementing regulations, which imposes criminal and civil liability, prohibits, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services; similar to the federal Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation; • HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, and their respective implementing regulations, which impose obligations on certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, known as covered entities, as well as their business associates that perform certain services involving the storage, use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity and their covered subcontractors, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable health information, and require notification to affected individuals and regulatory authorities of certain breaches of security of individually identifiable health information; • the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of covered drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid, or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with certain exceptions, to report annually to CMS information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other health care professionals (such as physician assistants and certain advance practices nurses), and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members, with the information made publicly available on a searchable website; • the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act which prohibits U.S. businesses and their representatives from offering to pay, paying, promising to pay or authorizing the payment of money or anything of value to a foreign official in order to influence any act or decision of the foreign official in his or her official capacity or to secure any other improper advantage in order to obtain or retain business; 98 • analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws, that may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers; and • certain state laws that require biopharmaceutical companies to comply with the biopharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government in addition to requiring drug manufacturers to report information related to payments to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and drug pricing information, and state and local laws that require the registration of biopharmaceutical sales representatives. Efforts to ensure that our current and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations could involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any such requirements, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, loss of eligibility to obtain approvals from the FDA, exclusion from participation in government contracting, healthcare reimbursement or other government programs, including Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, or reputational harm, any of which could adversely affect our financial results. These risks cannot be entirely eliminated. Any action against us for an alleged or suspected violation could cause us to incur significant legal expenses and could divert our management’s attention from the operation of our business, even if our defense is successful. In addition, achieving and sustaining compliance with applicable laws and regulations may be costly to us in terms of money, time and resources. Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not mean that we will be successful in obtaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in other jurisdictions. Obtaining and maintaining regulatory approval of our product candidates in one jurisdiction does not guarantee that we will be able to obtain or maintain regulatory approval in any other jurisdiction. For example, even if the FDA grants regulatory approval of a product candidate, comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions must also approve the manufacturing, marketing and promotion of the product candidate in those countries. However, a failure or delay in obtaining regulatory approval in one jurisdiction may have a negative effect on the regulatory approval process in others. Approval procedures vary among jurisdictions and can involve requirements and administrative review periods different from 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 that we intend to charge for our products is also subject to approval. Obtaining foreign regulatory approvals and compliance with foreign regulatory requirements could result in significant delays, difficulties and costs for us and could delay or prevent the introduction of our products in certain countries. If we or any partner we work with fail to comply with the regulatory requirements in international markets or fail to receive applicable regulatory approvals, our target market will be reduced and our ability to realize the full market potential of our product candidates will be harmed. Adverse side effects or other safety risks associated with BGE-102 or any future product candidates we may develop could delay or preclude approval, cause us to suspend or discontinue clinical trials or abandon further development, change the design of our clinical trials, limit the commercial profile of an approved product, or result in significant negative consequences following regulatory approval, if any. As is the case with small molecules generally, it is likely that there may be adverse side effects associated with the use of BGE-102 or any future product candidates. For example, in December 2024, we announced the discontinuation of our Phase 2 clinical trial of our former lead product candidate azelaprag following observation of liver transaminitis without clinically significant symptoms in some subjects receiving azelaprag. Future clinical trials may reveal significant adverse events not seen in our preclinical studies or prior clinical trials and may result in a safety or tolerability profile that could delay or prevent regulatory approval or market acceptance of BGE-102 or any future product candidates. Undesirable or clinically unmanageable side effects observed in our clinical trials for our product candidates could occur and cause us or regulatory authorities to interrupt, delay or halt our clinical trials and could result in more restrictive labeling than anticipated or the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. If additional adverse events, serious adverse events (SAEs) or other side effects are observed in any of our clinical trials that are atypical of, or more severe than, the known side effects of the respective class of agents that each of our product candidates are a part of, we may have difficulty recruiting participants to our clinical trials, participants may drop out of our trials, or we may be required to abandon those trials or our development efforts of one or more product candidates altogether. Furthermore, clinical trials by their nature utilize a sample of the potential patient population. With a limited number of subjects and limited duration of exposure, rare and severe side 99 effects of our product candidates or those of our competitors may only be uncovered with a significantly larger number of patients exposed to the drug. Undesirable or clinically unmanageable side effects observed in our clinical trials for our product candidates could also occur following discontinuation of azelaprag or any future product candidates with sufficient recovery periods, and we will need to monitor the severity and duration of side effects in our clinical trials. If such effects are more severe, less reversible than we expect or not reversible at all, we may decide or be required to perform additional studies or to halt or delay further clinical development of future product candidates, which could result in the delay or denial of regulatory approval by the FDA or other regulatory authorities. Adverse events and SAEs that emerge during clinical investigation of or treatment with BGE-102 or any future product candidates may be deemed to be related to our product candidates. 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 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 expectations for our product candidates, if approved. For example, in January 2025, we terminated development of azelaprag, an orally available small molecule agonist of APJ, for obesity and other chronic diseases. The decision followed observations of liver transaminitis without clinically significant symptoms, and without clear dose dependence, in some patients in the azelaprag arms of the STRIDES Phase 2 clinical trial for obesity. This may require longer and more extensive clinical development, or regulatory authorities may increase the amount of data and information required to approve, market or maintain approval for BGE-102 or any future product candidates and could result in warnings and precautions in our product labeling or a restrictive REMS. This may also result in an inability to obtain approval of BGE-102 or any future product candidates. We, the FDA or other regulatory authorities or an IRB or ethics committee may suspend clinical trials of a product candidate at any time for various reasons, including a belief that participants in such trials are being exposed to unacceptable health risks or adverse side effects. Even if the side effects do not preclude the product candidate from obtaining or maintaining regulatory approval, undesirable side effects may inhibit market acceptance of the approved product due to its tolerability versus other therapies. Further, it is possible that, as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials, including with different dosing regimens, or as the use of our drug candidates becomes more widespread following any regulatory approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other adverse events that were observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, will be reported by patients. Any of these developments could materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may conduct future clinical trials at sites outside the United States. The FDA may not accept data from trials conducted in such locations, and the conduct of trials outside the United States could subject us to additional delays and expense. The acceptance by the FDA or other regulatory authorities of trial data from clinical trials conducted outside their jurisdiction may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. Where foreign clinical trial 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 trial is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the trial 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 of the U.S. or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in current or future product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction. Conducting clinical trials outside the U.S. 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. 100 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 impair our ability to compete in domestic and international markets. We can face criminal liability and other serious consequences for violations, which can harm our business. U.S. and foreign anti-corruption, anti-money laundering, export control, sanctions and other trade laws and regulations prohibit, among other things, companies and their employees, agents, CROs, CDMOs, legal counsel, accountants, consultants, contractors and other partners 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. Export control and sanctions laws may also prohibit or limit our ability to sell or provide our drug candidates to embargoed countries, regions, governments, persons and entities. Violations of these laws can result in substantial criminal fines and civil penalties, imprisonment, the loss of trade privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences. 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 regulatory 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. Any violations of the laws and regulations described above may result in substantial civil and criminal fines and penalties, imprisonment, the loss of export or import privileges, debarment, tax reassessments, breach of contract and fraud litigation, reputational harm and other consequences. Risks Related to Our Common Stock Anti-takeover provisions in our charter documents and under Delaware law could prevent or delay an acquisition of us, which may be beneficial to our stockholders, and may prevent attempts by our stockholders to replace or remove our current management. Our restated certificate of incorporation and our restated bylaws contain provisions that could delay or prevent a change in control of our company. These provisions could also make it difficult for stockholders to elect directors who are not nominated by current members of our board of directors or take other corporate actions, including effecting changes in our management. These provisions: • establish a classified board of directors so that not all members of our board of directors are elected at one time; • permit only the board of directors to establish the number of directors and fill vacancies on the board of directors; • provide that directors may only be removed “for cause” and only with the approval of two-thirds of our stockholders; • require super-majority voting to amend some provisions in our restated certificate of incorporation and restated bylaws; • authorize the issuance of “blank check” preferred stock that our board of directors could use to implement a stockholder rights plan; • eliminate the ability of our stockholders to call special meetings of stockholders; • prohibit stockholder action by written consent, which requires all stockholder actions to be taken at a meeting of our stockholders; • prohibit cumulative voting; and • establish advance notice requirements for nominations for election to our board of directors or for proposing matters that can be acted upon by stockholders at annual stockholder meetings. In addition, Section 203 of the Delaware General Corporation Law (DGCL), may discourage, delay or prevent a change in control of our company. Section 203 imposes certain restrictions on mergers, business combinations and other transactions between us and holders of 15% or more of our common stock. 101 The exclusive forum provisions in our organizational documents may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or employees, or the underwriters of any offering giving rise to such claim, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Our restated certificate of incorporation, to the fullest extent permitted by law, provides that the Court of Chancery of the State of Delaware is the exclusive forum for: any derivative action or proceeding brought on our behalf; any action asserting a breach of fiduciary duty; any action asserting a claim against us arising pursuant to the DGCL, our restated certificate of incorporation, or our restated bylaws; or any action asserting a claim that is governed by the internal affairs doctrine. This exclusive forum provision does not apply to suits brought to enforce a duty or liability created by the Exchange Act. It could apply, however, to a suit that falls within one or more of the categories enumerated in the exclusive forum provision. This choice of forum provision may limit a stockholder’s ability to bring a claim in a judicial forum that it finds favorable for disputes with us or any of our directors, officers, or other employees, or the underwriters of any offering giving rise to such claims, which may discourage lawsuits with respect to such claims. Alternatively, if a court were to find the choice of forum provisions contained in our restated certificate of incorporation to be inapplicable or unenforceable in an action, we may incur additional costs associated with resolving such action in other jurisdictions, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Section 22 of the Securities Act creates concurrent jurisdiction for federal and state courts over all claims brought to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act or the rules and regulations thereunder. Our restated bylaws provide that the federal district courts of the United States will, to the fullest extent permitted by law, be the exclusive forum for resolving any complaint asserting a cause of action arising under the Securities Act, or the Federal Forum Provision, including for all causes of action asserted against any defendant named in such complaint. For the avoidance of doubt, this provision is intended to benefit and may be enforced by us, our directors, officers, other employees, agents, and the underwriters to any offering giving rise to such complaint, and any other professional person or entity whose profession gives authority to a statement made by that person or entity and who has prepared or certified any part of the documents underlying the offering. Our decision to adopt a Federal Forum Provision followed a decision by the Supreme Court of the State of Delaware holding that such provisions are facially valid under Delaware law. While federal or other state courts may not follow the holding of the Delaware Supreme Court or may determine that the Federal Forum Provision should be enforced in a particular case, application of the Federal Forum Provision means that suits brought by our stockholders to enforce any duty or liability created by the Securities Act must be brought in federal court and cannot be brought in state court, and our stockholders cannot waive compliance with the federal securities laws and the rules and regulations thereunder.