COMPASS Pathways plc 10-K

ITEM 1. BUSINESS Overview We are a biotechnology company dedicated to accelerating patient access to evidence-based innovation in mental health. We are motivated by the need to find better ways to help and empower people with serious mental health conditions who are not helped by existing treatments. We are pioneering a new paradigm for treating mental health conditions focused on rapid and durable responses through the development of our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment, potentially a first in class treatment. COMP360 is our proprietary psilocybin formulation that includes our pharmaceutical-grade polymorphic crystalline psilocybin, optimized for stability and purity. We believe that our COMP360 psilocybin treatment could offer a new approach to treatment of serious mental health conditions, including treatment-resistant depression, or TRD, which is a subset of major depressive disorder, or MDD, post-traumatic stress disorder, or PTSD, and potentially many other serious mental health conditions . Our initial focus is on TRD, comprising patients who are inadequately served by current treatment options. In 2018, we received Breakthrough Therapy designation from the FDA for COMP360 for the treatment of TRD. In November 2021, we announced positive top-line results from our Phase 2b clinical trial evaluating COMP360 for the treatment of TRD. On November 3, 2022, The New England Journal of Medicine published the positive results from our Phase 2b trial. This is the largest, randomized, controlled, double-blind psilocybin treatment clinical trial completed to date. The objective of the Phase 2b study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of a single dose of investigational COMP360 psilocybin (25mg or 10mg), compared to 1mg, in patients with TRD. The trial achieved its primary endpoint for the 25mg dose, with a 25mg dose of COMP360 demonstrating a statistically significant and clinically relevant treatment difference against the 1mg dose of COMP360 in reducing depressive symptom severity after three weeks. At the beginning of 2023, we commenced our Phase 3 program evaluating our COMP360 psilocybin treatment in TRD. The Phase 3 program is composed of two pivotal trials, each with a long-term follow-up component. The pivotal program design is as follows: • Pivotal trial 1 (COMP005) (n=255): a single dose (25mg) monotherapy compared with placebo. • Pivotal trial 2 (COMP006) (n= 568): a fixed repeat dose monotherapy using three dose arms: 25mg, 10mg and 1mg. This trial is designed to investigate whether a second dose can increase therapeutic response. • The primary endpoint in both pivotal trials is the change from baseline in the MADRS (Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale) total score at week 6. Beyond TRD, we have been exploring other indications, including PTSD. In May 2024, we completed and announced top-line results from our open label Phase 2 study to assess the safety and tolerability of COMP360 psilocybin treatment in participants with PTSD, as a result of trauma experienced as adults. In line with the study design, the study enrolled 22 participants, who were monitored for a 12-week period post dosing. The study met its primary safety endpoint and available secondary efficacy endpoints. Study observations included meaningful and sustained symptom improvement from baseline in mean CAPS-5 total score, a measure of disease severity, and in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score, a measure of functional impairment in daily life. Administration of COMP360 was well-tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with previous studies of COMP360. Based on the data from this trial, we are in the process of designing a late-stage PTSD program. The need for innovation in mental health care is significant, given that current treatment options are ineffective for millions of people. Our vision is a world of mental wellbeing – a world in which mental health isn’t simply the absence of mental illness, but the ability to flourish. We want to help reduce the stigma surrounding mental health, to acknowledge that “everyone has a story,” and to develop paradigm-changing new treatments for those who are not helped by existing treatment options. 9 Table of Contents Our Strategy Our mission is to accelerate patient access to evidence-based innovation in mental health. Key elements of our strategy to achieve this include: • Advance our Phase 3 registrational program for our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment for the treatment of TRD. In 2021, we completed a randomized, controlled Phase 2b clinical trial in 233 TRD patients, at 22 sites across North America and Europe. We announced positive top-line results from this trial in November 2021, the results of which were published in the New England Journal of Medicine in November 2022. Based on the results from the Phase 2b trial, we advanced clinical development in TRD and our Phase 3 registrational program is ongoing. We are nearing completion of enrollment in our first pivotal study in TRD, COMP005, and expect to report top-line 6-week data in the second quarter of 2025. We expect to report 26-week data from our COMP006 study in the second half of 2026. • Expand our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment into new indications, with our next focus on advancing a late-stage development program in PTSD. We believe that our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment may offer beneficial effects in other areas of high unmet need in mental health. Following positive Phase 2a results in May 2024 and securing additional funding in the first quarter of 2025, we are now in the process of designing a late-stage program in PTSD. • Maximize the potential to reach patients and realize the value of our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment by creating a new approach to treating mental health conditions. We retain global development and commercialization rights for our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment and are developing a commercial rollout plan in the event we are granted approval from regulatory authorities, working with payors to enable reimbursement and with health systems to enable broad patient access. Delivering COMP360 is expected to require the ability to implement COMP360 seamlessly within a provider’s operating practice. In order to ensure we understand implementation challenges, we have entered into agreements with several representative healthcare delivery centers such as Hackensack Meridian Health, a leading not-for-profit health care organization in New Jersey, and Greenbrook TMS (acquired by Neuronetics, Inc. in December 2024), which operates a network of treatment centers throughout the United States. The purpose of these agreements is to research and investigate models for the delivery of scalable, commercial COMP360 treatment within different types of healthcare delivery systems, assuming FDA approval. 10 Table of Contents Our Pipeline We are currently focusing our efforts on progressing our Phase 3 clinical program in TRD and starting a late-stage development program in PTSD. The following table summarizes the status of all our pipeline assets: Investigational COMP360 Psilocybin Treatment We are developing our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment for the treatment of a range of mental health conditions, with an initial focus on TRD. There is a large unmet need for new treatments to improve the response rate, remission rate, and durability of response for patients suffering with TRD. We believe our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment, if successfully developed and approved, represents a promising therapeutic option for TRD, as well as potentially for other mental health and neurological conditions, including PTSD. TRD TRD is a subset of MDD. MDD is a condition characterized by a persistent feeling of sadness and heightened negative emotions. It is considered a unipolar condition, which is a distinction between MDD and bipolar depression, the latter of which is often associated with an emotional state fluctuating between depression and hypomania or mania. MDD is a chronic recurring and serious mental health condition associated with high mortality rates, morbidity and diminished quality of life. The World Health Organization estimates as of 2023 that approximately 280 million people worldwide are suffering with MDD. The National Institute of Mental Health estimates as of 2021 that MDD affects approximately 21 million adults in the U.S. It is estimated that approximately 10 million adults with MDD in the U.S. are treated with medication and that approximately 1/3 of these medication-treated MDD patients, or approximately 3 million patients, are considered to have TRD. Due to the limitations of existing treatments, approximately one-third of adults with MDD will not respond to oral antidepressants and are considered to have TRD. TRD is defined as inadequate response to two oral medications. This condition is referred to as TRD. TRD has greater economic and societal cost than non-TRD MDD. TRD patients are often unable to perform daily tasks, are more likely to receive disability or welfare benefits and more frequently have co-occurring conditions compared with non-TRD MDD patients. In several studies, the direct medical costs for patients with TRD were significantly higher than those for non-TRD MDD patients, driven by, among other factors, increased rates of hospitalization and longer average hospital stays. Patients with TRD have a higher all-cause mortality compared with non-TRD MDD patients. Patients suffering with depression are treated through a variety of approaches, each of which can have significant shortcomings in certain subsets of patients. Most pharmacotherapies for depression target the modulation of the brain’s monoamine receptor system, and have exhibited limited efficacy in a significant portion of patients and can result in high relapse rates. There are only two medicines approved by the FDA for TRD in the US: esketamine and the fixed combination of olanzapine/fluoxetine (fluoxetine a selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitor). Esketamine was approved in 2019 by the FDA. In addition to pharmacotherapies, various forms of somatic intervention are also used, although these treatments tend to be 11 Table of Contents invasive and/or onerous, and there is limited data supporting their long-term benefit. Psychotherapy is another common treatment approach, but it requires a significant time commitment and is subject to large variability in availability and administration. Despite the range of treatments and therapies currently available for depression, patients suffering with TRD continue to be underserved, prolonging a significant health, social and economic burden. We believe patients suffering with TRD need a paradigm-shifting treatment that can deliver rapid and sustained relief of their depression. Limitations of Existing Therapies for Depression Because depression has biological, social, psychological, environmental, genetic, and stress-related determinants, many of which co-occur, treatment options are wide-ranging and often combined. Current pharmacological and non-pharmacological treatments, such as antidepressants and psychotherapy, are well-established and efficacious for a subset of MDD patients. However, many patients fail to experience any benefit or have only a partial response and often relapse. Clinicians often rely on a trial-and-error approach, course correcting as patients experience these relapses or difficult side effects. Experts are beginning to recommend a shift to more multi-modal treatments where different types of therapy are delivered concomitantly (i.e., a mix of pharmacotherapy, psychological/behavioral, and device interventions). Patients suffering with TRD are currently treated through a variety of approaches, each of which is associated with significant shortcomings. Consequently, there remains a need for a fast-acting, tolerable treatment that provides a durable response in this patient population. Despite the condition’s largely heterogeneous nature, most pharmacotherapies for depression use the same mechanism of action, targeting the brain’s various monoaminergic neurotransmitters. As evidenced by low response and high relapse rates, currently approved treatments are not effective for a large number of patients. We believe currently available options do not adequately meet the needs of patients suffering with TRD and there is a significant need for a new therapeutic approach. Pharmacotherapies There are five main categories of antidepressants available on the market. These are selective serotonergic reuptake inhibitors, or SSRIs, and serotonergic norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors, or SNRIs, atypical antidepressants, monoamine oxidase inhibitors, or MAOIs, and tricyclic antidepressants, or TCAs. These are frequently used in first- and second-line treatment of depression and can also be used after this point. The Star*D trial conducted by the National Institute of Mental Health in 2006 indicates that only approximately 37% of patients achieve remission with their initial antidepressant treatment and once a patient progresses to third and fourth line, their remission rates drop to 14% and 13% respectively. Currently approved antidepressants have significant limitations, including delayed onset of action, poor therapy adherence rates and substantial side effects. The onset of action for the most commonly used antidepressants is typically between six and eight weeks. Adherence levels are low, with average adherence rates for oral anti-depressant medications over twelve months being approximately 25%. There is limited evidence to effectively guide clinical decisions following non-response or partial response to first-line antidepressant medications. Recommended treatment approaches include optimizing the current antidepressant dose or switching to an antidepressant in the same or different class. Partial response or lack of response thereafter is recommended to be addressed by combining antidepressants from different pharmacological classes, or augmenting with an alternative medication, primarily with atypical antipsychotics, but also mood stabilizers, anticonvulsants, thyroid hormones and stimulants, and N-methyl-D-asparate, or NMDA, antagonists. Antipsychotics, such as olanzapine, quetiapine, cariprazine and aripiprazole are routinely used as adjunctive therapies when there is a lack of notable efficacy with an antidepressant. There is an approved combination of olanzapine and fluoxetine (an SSRI) for TRD. However, using antidepressants and antipsychotics together can have serious side effects, such as weight gain, other metabolic complications, sedation, extrapyramidal side effects (movement disorders), and QTc prolongation, which means the ventricles of the heart take longer than usual to recharge between beats. Esketamine/Ketamine Ketamine is an NMDA receptor antagonist that has been approved by the FDA for use for several decades in sedation and anesthesia. The S-enantiomer of ketamine, esketamine, is administered intranasally as a spray and has been approved by the FDA to treat TRD in conjunction with an oral antidepressant (2019), to treat depressive symptoms in adults with MDD with acute suicidal ideation or behavior (2020) and as a monotherapy to treat patients with TRD (2025). Ketamine and esketamine require multiple administration sessions. Both are DEA Schedule III products indicating potential for abuse. There are mixed efficacy results associated with the use of esketamine and esketamine treatments require frequent administration in a 12 Table of Contents controlled environment under medical supervision. This frequency makes administration costly for payors and burdensome for patients. Somatic Therapies Patients who suffer with severe TRD and have tried several courses of antidepressants are often treated with resource-intensive somatic therapies like electroconvulsive therapy, or ECT, repetitive transcranial magnetic stimulation, or rTMS, vagal nerve stimulation, or VNS, and deep brain stimulation, or DBS. These therapies are generally administered in inpatient settings. Somatic and device-related interventions like ECT and VNS are associated with significant adverse reactions and interventional risks, such as use of general anesthesia and memory loss in the case of ECT, and surgical intervention and infection risk with VNS implantation. Limitations of rTMS include seizures, pain, face twitching and application discomfort. Similarly, DBS has the potential to cause pain and seizures. These treatments are typically reserved for patients who have not been helped by other treatments, and are characterized as high-cost treatment options with reimbursement limited for a subset of these therapies. Despite the range of treatments and therapies available for MDD, patients suffering with TRD continue to be underserved, prolonging a significant health, social and economic burden. We believe patients suffering with TRD need a paradigm-shifting treatment that can deliver rapid and sustained relief of their depression. Post Traumatic Stress Disorder Like TRD, PTSD is a heterogeneous syndrome that can impact quality of life and lead to diminished cognitive and psychosocial functioning, fractured relationships, inability to maintain employment, substance abuse, high healthcare utilization costs, increased depression, and suicide risk. In some people, PTSD can be difficult to distinguish from anxiety and/or depression. PTSD can occur in people who have experienced or witnessed a traumatic event, such as a natural disaster, serious accident, war or rape. People who experience PTSD may relive their traumatic experience(s) through nightmares and flashbacks, have difficulty sleeping, experience intrusive thoughts and feel detached or estranged. Some people with PTSD experience symptoms immediately after the event, while for others symptoms may appear years later. It is estimated that approximately 311 million people globally will experience PTSD at some point during their lives. Only 20 -30% of patients treated with currently approved pharmacological interventions for PTSD will reach full remission. In the U.S., approximately 13 million people suffer from PTSD every year. PTSD disproportionately affects certain demographics including women, people from different racial and ethnic backgrounds and military veterans. The total economic burden for PTSD in the US surpassed $232.2 billion in 2018, or $19,630 per individual with PTSD. 13 Table of Contents Psilocybin Therapy Mechanism of Action of Psilocybin There is an accumulating body of evidence that psilocybin may have beneficial effects on depression and other mental health conditions. We believe that there are multiple mechanisms of action for psilocybin that could provide clinical benefit. As shown in the graphic below, by activating a distinct set of receptors in brain areas critical to mood and cognition, psilocybin acts to induce a range of downstream effects that may have important, sustained effects on brain function. In this way, evidence of the molecular, cellular, and systemic effects of psilocybin in the CNS supports the potential for psilocybin in the treatment of mental health conditions. 1. Stimulation of 5-HT 2A receptors results in downstream cascades via G-protein signaling. 2. Simultaneous effects involving multiple neurotransmitters and neuronal activation/signaling. 3. Down-regulation of the default mode network, or DMN, and de-synchronization of cortical activity as well as the emergence of new patterns of functional connectivity across the brain. 4. Sustained cellular changes leading to neuroplasticity and “window of opportunity” for therapy. Molecular Effects of Psilocybin: Partial Agonism of Serotonin Receptors At the molecular level, psilocybin is rapidly metabolized to its active metabolite psilocin, which is a partial agonist at several 5-hydroxytryptamine (serotonin) 2A, or 5-HT, receptors, also known as serotonin receptors, including 5-HT 2A , 2C , and 1A receptors. This means that psilocin binds to and activates these receptors, all of which are expressed in neurons in different areas of the CNS. In particular, many of the prominent acute effects of psilocybin, such as changes in emotion and cognition, are thought to be mediated by 5-HT 2A receptor stimulation, an interpretation that is supported by the fact that blocking the 5-HT 2A receptor prevents the psychedelic effects of psilocybin in humans. This mechanism of 5-HT 2A receptor stimulation is also implicated as a possible component of the antidepressant action of SSRIs, although these are thought to operate by inhibiting reuptake of serotonin by presynaptic neurons. In contrast, psilocin is believed to initiate an antidepressant effect by directly activating this receptor. The relevance of 5-HT 2A receptors in modulating depressive symptoms may is supported by the abundant expression of these receptors in areas of the brain that have important roles in regulating cognitive and emotional processing. Additionally, 5-HT 2A receptors are expressed in other key regions of the brain, like the hippocampus and nucleus accumbens, which are associated with functions like memory and reward processing, respectively. Cellular Effects: Activation of Downstream Signaling Cascades Activation of 5-HT 2A receptors by agonist ligands such as psilocin can modulate a number of downstream signaling cascades to alter the structure and function of neurons, which are important signaling components of the CNS. The 5-HT 2A 14 Table of Contents receptor is a G-protein coupled receptor, which means that it predominantly relays signals through a family of proteins called G-proteins. Specifically, the main signaling cascade downstream of 5-HT 2A receptors occurs via the Gα q/11 protein and leads to increased intracellular calcium release within the cell. In turn, this may promote neuron growth and function. However, non-canonical 5-HT 2A receptor signaling cascades specific to certain cell or tissue types may also exist, as there is evidence of certain downstream effects of psychedelic agonists occurring via the Gα i/o protein, which typically downregulates signaling pathways related to neurotransmitter release, for example, within neurons. This diverse range of cellular signaling cascades that may be modulated by psilocin likely underlie some of the local circuit-level effects of the drug. Local Circuit-Level Effects: Neurotransmitter Release and Neuroplasticity The consequences of 5-HT receptor signaling cascades as modulated by psilocin include (i) changes in activation of neurons in the brain, (ii) neuroplasticity, and (iii) alteration of neurotransmitter release. The activation of neurons, or depolarization, corresponds to positive ions flowing into these cells, which ultimately drives signal transmission and communication between neurons. Neuroplasticity refers to the ability of the nervous system to reorganize its structure and connections leading to new or adapted functions. This can involve the generation of new neurons, changes in neuron morphology and connectivity, and neurobiochemical changes in receptor and neurotransmitter levels. In particular, the expression of immediate early genes, or IEGs, such as Early Growth Receptor-1, or EGR-1 and Early Growth Receptor-2, or EGR-2, is induced by psilocin. IEGs are genes activated in response to external stimuli and are associated with depolarization. IEGs produce transcription factors that may cause wider changes in gene regulation and, in turn, could enable longer-term neuroplastic changes through structural and connectivity changes at the synapse. The fact that EGR-1 and EGR-2 appear to be induced specifically by psychedelic compounds suggests that these genes could be relevant to the acute and sustained effects of these drugs. Systemic Effects: Changes in Brain Activity and Functional Connectivity At the systemic level, psilocybin has been shown to alter the synchronicity of neuronal activation within and between different brain networks, during the psychedelic experience and afterwards. One network that has displayed altered functioning after psilocybin treatment in recent studies is the default mode network, or DMN, a network of brain areas that shows increased activation during self-referential mental activity and recollection of prior experiences and reduced activation during attention-demanding tasks. During the acute experience, psilocybin appears to temporarily reduce synchronicity of areas within the DMN, whereas connectivity between other brain areas and networks is substantially increased. The below figure is a visualization of the acute changes in brain network connectivity when healthy volunteers were administered with placebo (left) or psilocybin (right). Lines represent connections between or within brain networks (shown as nodes), with the width of those lines representing the weight of each connection. The size of each node corresponds to the sum of its weighted connections. Colors represent communities of networks or regions that are more commonly connected to one another than networks in different communities. Simplified V isualization of the A cute C hanges in B rain N etwork C onnectivity Placebo Psilocybin Study analyzed fMRI (functional magnetic resonance imaging) data from healthy volunteers to compare resting-state functional brain connectivity after intravenous infusion of placebo and psilocybin. Adapted from Petri et al, 2014. 15 Table of Contents On the day after these acute effects, individuals administered with psilocybin may exhibit increased synchronicity within the DMN, as well as changes between areas of the DMN and other brain regions. These brain network alterations may indicate the emergence of novel patterns of connectivity upon decoupling of the DMN and could lead to longer-term changes, such as altered emotional processing, that may ultimately affect behavior. Investigational COMP360 Psilocybin Clinical Development Programs COMP360 is our proprietary psilocybin formulation that includes our pharmaceutical-grade polymorphic crystalline psilocybin, optimized for stability and purity. We have conducted and/or are conducting clinical development programs in TRD, PTSD and anorexia nervosa. In our clinical trials, health care professionals, who possess an active license in good professional standing and have the relevant education, experience and training, are engaged and adhere to the below protocols, which are designed to monitor and safeguard clinical trial participants during their psychedelic experience. We have a manualized and standardized process to train healthcare professionals for consistent delivery across all our trial sites. An outline of the support model used in our clinical trials and our training program was published in January 2025 in the peer-reviewed American Journal of Psychiatry. Our trial protocols provide that such support is delivered over three different phases: preparation, the COMP360 administration session, and post-administration follow-up (integration). • Preparation: The objectives of the preparation sessions are to establish a therapeutic alliance between the patient and healthcare professional, and to demonstrate and practice the skills of self-directed inquiry and experiential processing, which we believe are critical for embracing the psychedelic experience in the psilocybin administration session. We have created an online preparation platform and MyPathfinder app for patients where they can learn more about what to expect from the experience and how to prepare for it. • COMP360 administration: A COMP360 administration session lasts approximately six to eight hours and at least one healthcare professional is present throughout the session to monitor and safeguard participants in our clinical trials. The healthcare professional’s goal during the session is to establish psychological safety, minimize anxiety and encourage openness to all emerging experiences. The session takes place in a room designed to have a comfortable and calming ambience. Patients wear eye shades to help them focus internally, lie on a bed, and listen to a carefully curated music playlist through a high-quality sound system and earphones. After the acute effects of psilocybin subside, patients are evaluated for safety and discharged. • Post-administration follow-up (integration): The objectives of the follow-up sessions are to help patients process the range of emotional and physical experiences facilitated by the psychedelic experience and to integrate any new insights that can lead to cognitive and behavioral changes. We believe COMP360 psilocybin can give patients a sense of agency, whereby they feel separate from their symptoms and empowered to make changes in their lives. The methods used in our clinical trials are based on our current understanding of psilocybin’s potential to disrupt dysfunctional neural pathways, to allow patients to generate new insights and perspectives leading to reduced negativity or rigidity in thinking. This rapid modification of thought patterns can be uncomfortable or anxiety-provoking. In our clinical trials, healthcare professionals refrain from intervening with the patient’s experience, unless required for safety reasons. Phase 2b Trial of Our COMP360 Psilocybin Treatment in TRD In 2021, we completed a Phase 2b international multi-site, randomized, controlled, double-blind, dose-finding clinical trial to assess the safety and efficacy of active doses of COMP360 (10mg or 25mg) compared with 1mg COMP360 in 233 patients suffering with TRD, across 22 trial sites in 10 countries in North America and Europe. In November 2022, The New England Journal of Medicine published the positive results from our Phase 2b trial of COMP360 psilocybin treatment for TRD. Trial Design Participants who were on serotonergic medications were required to taper off their medicine at least two weeks prior to the baseline (Day -1) visit. Prior to administration, participants received at least one, and up to three, preparatory sessions with an assigned healthcare professional, in order to be informed and prepared for the COMP360 psilocybin session. During the COMP360 psilocybin session, a single dose of COMP360 was administered to participants. The objective was to provide a 16 Table of Contents safe and supportive environment during the session. Participants received two post-administration follow-up (integration) sessions with their healthcare professionals in which the psychedelic experience was discussed. Participants were followed for up to 12 weeks, with a visit the day after administration followed by weekly visits for the first three weeks, and visits every three weeks for the remaining nine weeks. Primary, secondary and exploratory endpoints The primary endpoint of this trial was the change in the MADRS total score from baseline to week 3. MADRS, as assessed by independent raters in native language, is a widely accepted assessment of mood disorders. This variable was also being analyzed for change from baseline to Day 2, weeks 1, 6, 9 and 12. This Phase 2b clinical trial was powered to capture a statistically significant reduction in MADRS. Secondary endpoints of the trial included: • The proportion of participants with a response (defined as a ≥50% decrease in MADRS total score from baseline) at week 3; • The proportion of participants with remission (defined as a MADRS total score ≤10) at week 3; • The proportion of participants who had a sustained response at week 12. Sustained response was defined as the proportion of participants fulfilling response criteria at any visit up to and including week 3, that also fulfills response criteria at all subsequent visits up to and including week 12; and • Time to event measures: including restarting of antidepressant medication for any reason, suicidality, hospitalization for depression, and relapse from a previous response to COMP360 psilocybin treatment. The safety and tolerability of COMP360 in study participants was assessed based on AEs, vital signs, clinical laboratory assessments, ECG findings and suicidal ideation/behavior (measured using the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale, or C-SSRS score, at all visits). The trial also assessed exploratory endpoints including, but not limited to, quality of life (EQ-5D-3L), functional impairment (Sheehan Disability Scale, SDS), psychosocial functioning (Work and Social Adjustment scale, WSAS), cognition (Digit Symbol Substitution Test, DSST), anxiety (Generalized anxiety disorder, GAD-7), and self-reported depression severity (QIDS-SR-16). Enrollment Criteria We recruited a total of 233 adult patients with TRD into the trial. We define patients with TRD as those who meet Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders, 5 th Edition, or DSM-5, diagnostic criteria for a single or recurrent episode of MDD without psychotic features, who have not responded to an adequate dose and duration of two, three, or four pharmacological treatments for the current episode of depression. Clinical findings The 25mg group vs the 1mg group showed a -6.6 difference on the MADRS depression scale at week 3 (p<0.001). The 25mg group demonstrated statistical significance on the MADRS efficacy endpoint on the day after the COMP360 psilocybin administration, day 2 (p=0.002). The 10mg vs 1mg dose did not show a statistically significant difference at week 3. The MADRS was assessed by independent raters who were remote from the trial site, and blind to intervention and study design, effectively creating a triple blind. Change from baseline in MADRS total score 17 Table of Contents MADRS = Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale At week 3, 36.7% (29 patients) in the 25mg group were classified as responders (defined as a ≥50% decrease in MADRS total score from baseline), compared with 17.7% (14 patients) in the 1mg group. Furthermore, 29.1% (23 patients) in the 25mg group were deemed to be in remission (defined as a MADRS total score ≤10) at week 3, compared with 7.6% (6 patients) in the 1mg group. At week 12, 20.3% (16 patients) in the 25mg group were sustained responders (defined as meeting the MADRS response criteria at week 3 and week 12, and at least at one visit out of week 6 and week 9) compared with 10.1% (8 patients) in the 1mg group. 18 Table of Contents MADRS response and remission rates 19 Table of Contents MADRS = Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale MADRS sustained response rates MADRS = Montgomery-Åsberg Depression Rating Scale. Number of sustained responders stated in bar. Patients meeting the MADRS response criteria at any visit up to and including week 3 and at all subsequent visits up to and including at week 12, and who did not start any new treatments for depression. As well as looking at clinician-rated depression severity on the MADRS, the trial explored other aspects recognized as being important for patients with TRD - and essential to recovery - including positive and negative affect, anxiety, self-rated depression severity, quality of life, functioning and cognition. These exploratory measures also showed that patients in the 25mg dose group of COMP360 psilocybin treatment reported benefits on those measures over those in the 1mg group. On the Positive and Negative Affect Schedule measuring positive and negative affect, patients in the 25mg group had a higher increase in positive affect (e.g., including feeling interested, excited, strong) and a greater decrease in negative affect (including feeling distressed, upset, afraid) on the day after COMP360 administration and at the questionnaire’s final administration at week 3. On scales measuring anxiety (the Generalized Anxiety Disorder – 7 item scale), self-rated depression (QIDS-SR-16) and functioning (Sheehan Disability Scale and Work and Social Adjustment Scale), a greater improvement was also shown at week 3 by patients in the 25mg group compared with the 1mg group. A post-hoc analysis of the 16 sustained responders in the 25mg group found that changes in quality of life, self-reported depression severity, and functioning, were clinically meaningful, with mean scores for these patients returning to “normal” levels and maintained to 12 weeks, the end of the trial. Additionally, sustained responders were found to have clinically meaningful increases in positive affect from baseline at day 2 and week 3. 20 Table of Contents COMP360 was generally well tolerated, with more than 90% of treatment-emergent adverse events (TEAEs) being mild or moderate in severity and greater than 77% of TEAEs occurring on the day of administration being resolved on the same day or the next day. 179 patients reported at least one TEAE; the most common TEAEs across treatment groups (>10% overall 21 Table of Contents incidence) were headache, nausea, fatigue, and insomnia. There were 12 patients, 5 patients in the 25 mg group, 6 patients in the 10 mg group and 1 in the 1 mg group, who reported treatment-emergent serious adverse events (TESAEs). These TESAEs included, among others, suicidal behavior, intentional self-injury, and suicidal ideation, which are regularly observed in a TRD patient population. Two thirds of the patients had previous thoughts of wishing to be dead, as assessed by a suicidality scale completed during patient screening; this included all patients reporting one of these adverse events, meaning that patients who experienced these events during the trial had said in patient screening that they had had suicidal thoughts prior to the trial. Overall, 209 patients completed the study; there were five withdrawals from the 25mg group, nine from the 10mg, and 10 from the 1mg. Phase 2 Study of COMP360 Psilocybin Treatment as Adjunct to SSRI Antidepressants In addition to our completed Phase 2b trial, we also completed a Phase 2 trial of the safety and efficacy of COMP360 in TRD patients when administered as an adjunct to SSRIs. Results of this study were published in Neuropsychopharmacology in July 2023. This open-label study included 19 patients from clinical sites in Ireland and the United States. The primary endpoint was the change in baseline MADRS total score at 3 weeks in patients having 25mg COMP360 psilocybin treatment given in augmentation with their existing SSRI antidepressant regimen. Clinical Findings The baseline MADRS score of participants entering the study was 31.7, representing moderate to severe depression. At week 3, 8 of the 19 participants (42.1%) were responders and all 8 were also remitters. The mean reduction from baseline observed in MADRS total score was 14.9 at week 3. There was a rapid response from day 2 to week 3 after COMP360 therapy, which is consistent with the Phase 2b result. 22 Table of Contents Change from baseline in MADRS total score COMP360 psilocybin treatment using a 25mg dose also showed overall signals of improvement in most other measures including improvement in anxiety, clinician and self-rated depressive symptoms, and positive and negative affect. 25mg COMP360 psilocybin treatment was generally well-tolerated when it was administered simultaneously with the patient’s existing SSRI treatment. There were no TEAEs classed as serious (life threatening, leading to disabilities, hospitalization or in general medically significant) and no TEAEs related to suicidal ideation or behavior or intentional self-injury. Long-Term Phase 2 Study During 2022, we completed a long-term follow-up study of 66 participants who took part in our Phase 2b trial. Of the 66 participants, 22 participants were in the 25mg group, 19 participants were in the 10mg group, 17 participants were in the 1mg group and 8 participants were in the 25mg plus SSRI group. The primary endpoint of this Phase 2b follow-up study was the median time to a new depressive event. The pre-specified primary analysis was of the median time for such an event for all participants in our Phase 2b trial, not only those who took part in the long-term follow-up study. The median time to a new depressive event was 92 days for the COMP360 25mg group compared to 86 days for the 10mg group and 62 days for the 1mg group. In an additional post-hoc analysis to support the primary endpoint only including those participants from our Phase 2b study who took part in the long-term follow up study (COMP004) the median time to such an event was longer (189 days) for the COMP360 25mg group compared to the 10mg group (43 days) and the 1mg group (21 days) (patients entering from our Phase 2b study). Twenty-seven or 40.9% of participants had an adverse event that was ongoing as of, or started, after week 12. In addition, a lower proportion of participants started new treatments for depression in the 25mg and 10mg arm compared to the 1mg arm. Suicidality was recorded as an adverse event twice in the 25mg group, twice in the 10mg group, and once in the 1mg group. The outcomes of the long-term follow-up study informed the design of our Phase 3 registrational program, including investigating whether a second administration of COMP360 may achieve improved durability, response and remission outcomes. Phase 3 Registrational Program and Supportive Studies Our Phase 3 program evaluating our COMP360 psilocybin treatment in TRD is ongoing. The Phase 3 program is composed of two pivotal trials, each with a long-term follow-up component. The pivotal program design is as follows: 23 Table of Contents • Pivotal trial 1 (COMP005) (n=255): a single dose (25mg) monotherapy compared with placebo. We are conducting the COMP005 study at sites in the U.S. We are nearing completion of enrollment and expect to report top-line six-week data in the second quarter of 2025 and then the 26-week 005 data once all participants in the 006 trial have completed Part A of the ‘006 trial. • Pivotal trial 2 (COMP006) (n= 568): a fixed repeat dose monotherapy using three dose arms: 25mg, 10mg and 1mg. This trial is designed to investigate whether a second dose can increase therapeutic response. We are conducting this study at sites in the U.S., UK, Canada and Europe. We expect to report 26-week data by the second half of 2026. • The primary endpoint in both pivotal trials is the change from baseline in MADRS total score at week 6. Each of these trials has three parts: Part A is the primary efficacy portion at Week 6, Part B is a blinded 20 week portion and Part C is a 26-week open-label portion. In Part B, participants who complete Part A will be followed for 20 weeks and those who meet criteria for re-treatment will have the option to receive an additional treatment dose according to their assigned dose. Participants who complete part B and go into Part C during which participants who meet criteria for re-treatment may receive a 25mg dose of COMP360 psilocybin. We believe that this design will enable us to appropriately characterize the efficacy, safety and durability of COMP360 administration. During the first quarter of 2023, we also commenced a Phase 2 (n=102) study to investigate the safety and tolerability of COMP360 psilocybin treatment in patients with major depressive disorder, or MDD. In addition, pharmacokinetics of COMP360 psilocybin treatment will be investigated. We expect to submit the results of this study as part of our submission package for approval of COMP360 psilocybin treatment in TRD. Phase 2 Study in PTSD We completed a Phase 2 clinical trial to assess the safety and tolerability of COMP360 psilocybin treatment, as a monotherapy in participants with PTSD, as a result of trauma experienced as adults. It was a multicenter, fixed-dose open label study. Participants were required to taper off their medicines. Twenty-two participants received a single 25mg dose of investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment. In line with the study design, participants were monitored for a 12-week period post dosing. In May 2024, we reported top-line results from this study. The study met its primary safety endpoint and available secondary efficacy endpoints. Study observations included meaningful and sustained symptom improvement from baseline in mean CAPS-5 total score, a measure of disease severity, and in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) score, a measure of functional impairment in daily life. Administration of COMP360 was well-tolerated, with a safety profile consistent with previous studies. The key findings include: • Administration was generally well tolerated, with no serious adverse events observed. There were no treatment-emergent serious adverse events. Treatment-emergent adverse events included headache (n=11 or 50.0%), nausea (n=8 or 36.4%), crying (n=6 or 27.3%), and fatigue (n=6 or 27.3%). There were two adverse events of suicidal ideation that resolved during the study. The first was a moderate and transient event which resolved on administration day in a patient who went on to be a responder, and it was deemed to be related to study drug. The second event was mild and occurred at week 7 in a non-responder, resolved during the study, and was deemed to be possibly related to study drug. Both participants had previous history of suicidality as measured by the Columbia-Suicide Severity Rating Scale. • Durable improvement in symptoms from baseline observed following a single administration. Improvement in mean CAPS-5 total score from a baseline of 47.5 was observed (29.9 point reduction at week 4 and 29.5 point reduction at week 12). • Improvement over time in Sheehan Disability Scale (SDS) measure of functional impairment over 12 weeks. From a mean SDS total score of 22.7 at baseline, there was a 11.7 point reduction at week 4 and a 14.4 point reduction at week 12. • High and sustained rates of response and remission relative to baseline, with early onset of symptom improvement. Response, as defined by patients experiencing a ≥ 15-point improvement on CAPS-5 score, was 81.8% at week 4 and 77.3% at week 12. Remission, as defined by CAPS-5 total score of ≤ 20, was 63.6% at week 4 and 54.5% at week 12. • No patients withdrew from the study and no patients returned to antidepressant medication treatment during the trial. 24 Table of Contents The open-label, multi-center, phase 2 safety study evaluated investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment in 22 patients with PTSD resulting from trauma in adulthood. Participants received a single 25mg dose along with psychological support. Psychological support was provided by a licensed medical professional to ensure patient safety, which consisted of preparing participants for the treatment session, observing and being present with patients during the session and supporting them after the session. Primary endpoint was safety at week 12; available secondary endpoints were change in CAPS-5 from baseline and change in SDS total score from baseline. The mean baseline severity of symptoms was a baseline of 47.5 (minimum of 25; maximum of 64) CAPS-5 total score, which is considered severe. The CAPS-5 assessment involves a structured interview that provides a PTSD diagnosis and measures symptom severity. The average age of participants at the time of screening was 39 and patients diagnosed with complex PTSD were excluded from study eligibility. The study was conducted at The Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology and Neuroscience at King’s College London, Icahn School of Medicine at Mount Sinai in New York and Sunstone Therapies in Rockville, Maryland. Phase 2 Study in Anorexia We closed enrollment in the second half of 2024 for a double-blind randomized controlled Phase 2 clinical trial investigating the safety and efficacy of COMP360 psilocybin in participants with anorexia nervosa. It is a multicenter study and enrolled 32 patients. We expect to report data from this study in 2025. Other Indications: Investigator-Initiated Studies, or IISs With respect to clinical studies, we work with leading academic institutions and researchers under IIS clinical trial agreements. These institutions include: Imperial College London, King’s College London, Maryland Oncology Hematology, New York State Psychiatric Institute at Columbia University Medical Center, Sheppard Pratt, UC San Diego School of Medicine, University of Copenhagen, and University of Zurich. The indications previously explored or currently being explored in these IIS signal-generating and mechanistic studies include: anorexia nervosa, autism, bipolar type II depression, body dysmorphic disorder, chronic cluster headache, depression in cancer, MDD, severe TRD, and suicidal ideation. We supply our IIS researchers with COMP360 psilocybin and encourage the open publication of all study findings. If an IIS using COMP360 psilocybin produces results with the potential to improve mental health care, we may seek to advance this research through a clinical development program, with the goal of making it available for patients, although we have no pre-existing contractual right to do so. In addition to providing our IIS researchers with COMP360 psilocybin, we have in the past offered, and may continue to offer, support with regulatory submissions. Through our IIS collaborations, we ultimately hope to bring more innovation to patients, as quickly and safely as possible. In May 2022, we announced that we would fund an IIS that will use COMP360 psilocybin to explore how COMP360 psilocybin affects specific brain pathways in autistic adults. The double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study will investigate whether there is a difference in the function of serotonin brain networks in autistic and non-autistic adults. The researchers will use a range of imaging techniques and behavioral tasks to examine how the serotonin system is modulated by COMP360 psilocybin. This exploratory study is being conducted by a research scientist who is employed by us and is a PhD student at King’s College London. The study is being conducted at the Institute of Psychiatry, Psychology & Neuroscience (IoPPN) at King’s College London and is co-sponsored by King’s IoPPN and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust. It will enroll 70 adult participants, including 40 autistic people and 30 non-autistic people. Data from IISs In 2020, Imperial College London, London, UK completed an IIS of COMP360 titled “Psilocybin for Major Depressive Disorder: Comparative Mechanisms” (Psilodep-RCT, ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03429075). In this randomized, double-blind, exploratory clinical trial, the efficacy and mechanisms of action of COMP360 were compared with those of a six-week course of the SSRI, escitalopram. A total of 59 adult participants with MDD of at least moderate severity were randomized to receive either two 25mg doses of COMP360 three weeks apart or six weeks of daily escitalopram (10mg for three weeks and 20mg for the following three weeks) alongside two 1mg doses COMP360 three weeks apart. In both trial arms, participants received psychological support as part of the trial. The primary efficacy endpoint of the change from baseline on the 16-item Quick Inventory of Depressive Symptomatology-Self-Report (QIDS-SR-16) showed a two-point trend in favor of the COMP360 arm which was apparent from week 1. Adjusted-response rates for QIDS-SR-16 (defined as ≥50% reduction from baseline in the QIDS-SR-16 total score) at week 6 were 70.2% for the COMP360 arm vs. 48.0% for the 25 Table of Contents escitalopram arm and adjusted-remission rates (defined as a QIDS-SR-16 total score ≤5) at week 6 were 57.1% and 29.1%, respectively. For the MADRS – a more widely used and accepted clinician-rated scale which Compass is using as the primary endpoint in their clinical trials – a least square means treatment difference of -7.2 was found. Similar patterns were found on other secondary endpoints measuring work and social functioning, anxiety, avoidance, anhedonia, and wellbeing. This work has been published in the New England Journal of Medicine (Carhart-Harris et al. 2021). In 2021, Maryland Oncology Hematology at the Aquilino Cancer Center in Rockville, Maryland, U.S. completed an IIS of COMP360 titled “The Safety and Efficacy of Psilocybin in Cancer Patients with Major Depressive Disorder” (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04593563). In this open-label study involving 30 patients with a cancer diagnosis and MDD, patients received a 25mg dose of COMP360 in conjunction with psychological support. Patients began with an average MADRS score of 25.9, representing moderate depression and after COMP360 psilocybin treatment, the average score decreased by 19.1 points. A sustained response (a decrease of ≥50% in the MADRS total score from baseline observed at any visit up to and including week 3, and also fulfilled at week 8) was seen in 24 patients; 15 patients showed remission of depressive symptoms (a MADRS score <10) one week after a single dose of COMP360, which was sustained up to eight weeks. COMP360 psilocybin treatment was found to be generally well-tolerated with no treatment-related serious adverse events. Adverse effects on the day of dosing were transient and as expected in line with other studies included headache, changes in sensory perception, and mood alteration. Top-line results were published in JAMA Oncology in April 2023 and the full results and methodology from this study were published in Cancer in December 2023. In 2022, Sheppard Pratt Health System completed an IIS of COMP360 titled “An Open Label Study of the Safety and Efficacy of COMP360 in Participants With Severe Treatment-Resistant Depression (P-TRD)”. The investigator presented data from this study at the Society of Biological Psychiatry Annual Meeting in the second quarter of 2022. In this open-label study involving 12 patients with severe treatment-resistant depression, patients received a 25mg dose of COMP360 with psychological support. All participants had tried at least five antidepressant treatments without success, prior to joining the study. The researchers found that 58.3% (n=7) of the participants had maintained MADRS response criteria at 12 weeks after COMP360 psilocybin administration, and a quarter had maintained remission (n=3). There was no increase in the suicidality score based on the MADRS, and no treatment-related serious adverse events were reported throughout the study. In 2022, the University of California San Diego School of Medicine completed an IIS of COMP360 titled “Evaluation of Psilocybin in Anorexia Nervosa: Safety and Efficacy.” (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04661514). The investigator presented data from this study at the Society of Biological Psychiatry Annual Meeting in the second quarter of 2022. In this open-label study involving 10 patients with anorexia nervosa, patients received a 25mg dose of COMP360 in conjunction with psychological support. The primary aim of this study was to assess the safety and tolerability of a single 25mg dose of psilocybin in participants with anorexia nervosa based on adverse events, changes in vital signs, electrocardiograms and clinical laboratory tests. Forty percent (n=4) experienced clinically meaningful reductions at the 3-month follow-up, based on global score on the Eating Disorder Examination (EDE). Participants demonstrated nominally statistically significant reductions in shape concerns on the EDE at the 1-month follow-up (mean change from pre-treatment=1.3; p=0.028), and nominally statistically significant reductions in eating concerns on the EDE at the 3-month follow-up (mean change from pre-treatment=1.1; p=0.047). Changes in weight concerns on the EDE were approaching nominal statistical significance at the 3-month follow-up but were not statistically significant (mean change from pre-treatment=1.2). COMP360 psilocybin treatment was well-tolerated with no treatment-related serious adverse events reported. In July 2023, the results of this study showing the potential of investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment in anorexia nervosa were published in Nature Medicine . In 2022, Sheppard Pratt Health System completed an IIS of COMP360 titled “The Safety and Efficacy of Psilocybin in Participants With Type 2 Bipolar Disorder (BP-II) Depression.” (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT0443384512). The investigator presented data from this study at the Annual Meeting of the American College of Neuropsychopharmacology (ACNP) in December 2022. In this open-label study involving 14 patients with type 2 bipolar depression, patients received a 25mg dose of COMP360 with psychological support. The study found that 86% (12 out of 14) of the participants met response and remission criteria for the MADRS scale at 12 weeks after COMP360 psilocybin treatment. There was no increase in the suicidality score based on the MADRS, no manic symptoms and no unexpected adverse events or difficulties with the dosing sessions reported throughout the study. No treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. In December 2023, the results of this study demonstrating the potential of investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment in type 2 bipolar depression were published in JAMA Psychiatry . In 2022, University of Zurich completed an IIS of COMP360 titled “Phase II, Randomized, Double Blind, Placebo Controlled, Parallel Group, Single Center Study of Psilocybin Efficacy in Major Depression.” (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03715127). The investigator published data from this study in The Lancet (Von Rotz et al, Lancet 2023; 56:101809). In 26 Table of Contents this double-blind, randomized clinical trial, 52 patients with major depressive disorder were randomized 1:1 to receive either a single, moderate dose (0.215 mg/kg body weight) of COMP360 psilocybin or placebo in conjunction with psychological support. MADRS and Beck's Depression Inventory (BDI) scores were assessed to estimate depression severity and the primary endpoints were defined as changes from baseline to two weeks after the administration of COMP360. At the two-week endpoint, response rates resulted in 58% for MADRS (COMP360 psilocybin: 15/26 vs. Placebo: 4/26; P = 0.0034) and for BDI in 54% (COMP360 psilocybin: 14/26 vs. Placebo: 3/26; P = 0.0025). At the two-week endpoint, remission rates were reported in 54% of patients for MADRS (COMP360 psilocybin: 14/26 vs. Placebo: 3/26; P = 0.0023) and assessed by BDI in 46% (COMP360 psilocybin: 12/26 vs. Placebo: 3/26; P = 0.013). Adverse events were in line with other studies and included headache, dizziness, nausea and diarrhea. No cases of suicidal behavior occurred during the trial period of approximately one month and no treatment-related serious adverse events were reported. Preclinical and Drug Discovery Programs Prior to our strategic reorganization in the fourth quarter of 2024 and decision to stop all non-COMP 360 preclinical activities to allow us to focus entirely on advancing development of our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment, we progressed a number of preclinical initiatives during 2024. We retain rights to these preclinical assets and may in the future decide to resume our preclinical activities. Mechanistic Studies We continue to work with a small group of academic researchers and CROs to investigate mechanistic characteristics of psilocybin treatment. We currently have a network of studentships predominantly within the United Kingdom (namely at the following universities: University of Oxford, University of Bristol, University of Reading and University of Southampton, University of Cardiff) to research elements of this work. Our mechanistic research utilizes our COMP360 and currently focuses on the following themes:   • Study of the mechanisms by which psilocin, the active moiety of our high-purity polymorphic crystalline formulation of psilocybin, and other psychedelic agents engage receptors in recombinant cell-based assays (collaboration with Professor Trevor Sharp, University of Oxford). The aim here is to understand which systems are optimal to use for discovery research, how different drugs may influence receptor-mediated signal transduction, and how mechanisms of biased agonism may play into mechanistic effects;   • Through collaborations with the University of Bristol (Professor Emma Robinson and Professor Jack Mellor , in particular), we are also investigating the integrated electrophysiological response to psychedelic administration, to determine how changes in neuronal excitatory activity mediate brain-wide changes in resting state network activity and how these influence sustained changes in behavior;  • Preclinical academic collaborations with the University of Bristol, Harvard University, Oxford University and the Southern Denmark University have studied the effects of our high-purity polymorphic crystalline formulation of psilocybin on different aspects of behavior, including affective bias, reward learning and compulsive behavior that may provide insights relevant to information processing alterations frequently observed in mental health conditions. In particular, work at the University of Oxford (collaboration with Professor Mark Walton) is utilizing novel behavioral pharmacological techniques to assess the impact of our high-purity polymorphic crystalline formulation of psilocybin for effects on cognitive flexibility at periods hours to days after administration. • Collaborations with the University of Reading and the University of Southampton also focus on understanding what the potential role of inflammatory modulating processes might be in the mechanism of action of COMP360, and consider whether COMP360 may have utility in other types of CNS indications. Collaborations with the University of Cardiff (Professor Dominic Dwyer) will also consider effects of COMP360 on measures of affective behavior and anhedonia in transgenic mice carrying disease-relevant genetic mutations, and integrate these findings with cellular and electrophysiological changes;   These studies will further our understanding of the mechanism of action for COMP360 and could inform our future decisions over which other indications, if any, to explore, beyond TRD and PTSD. 27 Table of Contents Drug Discovery Center On August 5, 2020, we established a Drug Discovery Center under a sponsored research agreement with the University of the Sciences in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania (which merged into Saint Joseph’s University in 2022), or USciences, to focus on developing optimized psychedelic and related compounds targeting the 5-HT 2A receptor, which is believed to mediate the potential therapeutic effects of psychedelics. Further to the strategic reorganization we announced in the fourth quarter of 2024 and our decision to stop non-COMP360 preclinical and discovery work and focus all our resources on advancing development of our investigational COMP360 treatment, this agreement with USciences was not renewed and will terminate in the second quarter of 2025. Pursuant to the agreement, USciences performed research services on our behalf, and granted us an exclusive, royalty bearing, worldwide license, including rights to sublicense, all jointly held intellectual property for any and all purposes, and a non-exclusive, fully paid-up, worldwide license to any pre-existing intellectual property utilized over the course of performing the services. As of December 31, 2024, we had identified one compound under this agreement. If in the future we decide to resume development efforts for this compound, we would be obligated to make tiered payments upon completion of certain milestones to USciences for up to an aggregate of $0.9 million per licensed product covered by a valid claim of a patent included in the intellectual property rights licensed to us under the agreement, as well as a low single-digit royalty percentage on annual net sales of licensed products covered by a valid claim of a patent included in the intellectual property rights licensed to us under the agreement, subject to certain reductions. In addition, USciences is entitled to a low double-digit percentage of sublicense revenue for agreements entered into prior to a Phase 2 trial, and a mid-single-digit percentage of sublicense revenue for agreements entered into after the start of a Phase 2 trial. Ongoing research on prodrug development led to a number of potential candidate leads being identified. We retain rights to these potential candidates and in the future to the extent that we decide to resume non-COMP360 preclinical activities we may continue such potential candidates through further research-based development. Investment Delix Therapeutics On March 6, 2020 we made a strategic investment to acquire 1,250,000 shares of series seed preferred stock in Delix Therapeutics, Inc., a clinical-stage neuroscience company developing novel neuroplasticity-promoting therapeutics for psychiatric and neurological disorders.. Using Digital Technology We believe digital technology can help increase patient access to mental health treatment and services and manage their mental health conditions. Furthermore, digital tools have the potential to enable greater self-care, as they may support patients managing depressive episodes on their own and may complement and augment psychotherapy and pharmacological treatments. Working with third parties, we currently use digital technology in our clinical trials in a number of ways: • An online and mobile app preparation platform for participants in our TRD trial to educate them and help prepare them for their psilocybin experience; • A web-based “shared knowledge” interactive healthcare professional training platform, complementing our comprehensive face-to-face training program; • Collection of measurements in our clinical trials, including remote data collection using mobile devices so patients do not need to travel into study sites for all in-clinic visits; • Collection of some digital phenotyping information through the measurement of human-smartphone interactions; and • Harnessing AI and natural language processing capabilities to potentially characterize the mechanism of change and assess fidelity to our treatment protocol for psychological support. 28 Table of Contents We have built an in-house digital team with experience in digital technology, engineering and AI, which we refer to as augmented intelligence as well as artificial intelligence. This team has focused on researching and developing proprietary digital tools and technology to test evidence-based methods for assessing mental health treatments. We are exploring externalizing this team and these technologies and the associated intellectual property to a new company established by our co-founders, George Goldsmith and Ekaterina Malievskaia that could potentially support an evidence-based approach for any company developing or delivering mental health treatments. We expect to have a final decision on this externalization in the second quarter of 2025. Manufacturing and Supply We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We rely on contract drug manufacturing organizations, or CDMOs, to synthesize the active pharmaceutical ingredient, or API, that comprises COMP360, and to blend the API excipients and encapsulate. All manufacturing processes are contracted to be compliant with current Good Manufacturing Practice (cGMP). We expect to continue to rely on third parties for the production of all clinical supply drug substance and drug product that we may use. We use additional contract manufacturers to fill, label, package, store and distribute our drug product. We currently rely on a single supplier for our API but have identified additional manufacturers who have the appropriate experience and expertise to act as back-up suppliers of API and fill-and-finish services. We believe we maintain sufficient supply of API to avoid any material disruptions in the event of any need to replace one or more of our suppliers. Commercialization If our COMP360 psilocybin treatment is approved, we plan to use our own sales and marketing capabilities, targeting public and private healthcare providers and clinic networks in the U.S. In select geographies outside the U.S., we may enter into commercialization collaborations with third parties who have complementary commercial capabilities. We recognize that COMP360 psilocybin treatment, if approved, represents a new approach for many clinical practices and that delivering COMP360 is expected to require the ability to implement COMP360 seamlessly within a provider’s operating practice. In order to ensure we understand implementation challenges, we entered into agreements with different types of healthcare delivery centers, including Hackensack Meridian Health, a leading not-for-profit health care organization in New Jersey, and Greenbrook TMS (acquired by Neuronetics, Inc. in December 2024), which operates a network of treatment centers throughout the United States, to research and investigate models for the delivery of scalable, commercial COMP360 psilocybin treatment within various types of healthcare delivery systems, assuming FDA approval. We have established Centers of Excellence to serve as research facilities and innovation labs. In strategic collaboration with King’s College London and South London and Maudsley NHS Foundation Trust, or SLaM, we opened The Center for Mental Health Research and Innovation with an overarching goal of accelerating patient access to evidence-based innovation in mental health care by driving forward research in psychedelic therapies through, among other things, the development of working model psychedelic treatment clinics, training programs, conducting clinical trials, and data analysis. The Center currently serves as a clinical trial site for our Phase 3 COMP006 trial. Competition Our industry is characterized by many newly emerging and innovative technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary product rights. While we believe that our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment represents a fundamental shift in the treatment paradigm relative to other TRD treatments, we face potential competition from many different sources, including major pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, governmental agencies and medical research organizations. Any product candidates that we successfully develop and commercialize, including our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment, will compete with the standard of care and new therapies, both pharmacological and somatic, that may become available in the future. Currently, only two pharmacotherapies are approved for TRD in the U.S.: Spravato (esketamine), marketed by Janssen, which is an NMDA receptor antagonist; and olanzapine and fluoxetine hydrochloride capsules, which are available generically. Because TRD, by definition, encompasses patients who have not been helped after two or more MDD therapies, antidepressants indicated for use in MDD are frequently prescribed, combined or augmented with a second agent to treat TRD patients. Several biopharmaceutical companies have therapies in clinical development for TRD. We are aware that Supernus 29 Table of Contents Pharmaceuticals, Neurocrine Biosciences, GH Research and Beckley Psytech, among others, are developing treatments for TRD or inadequate response to treatment in major depressive disorder. Multiple somatic therapies are also used in TRD, such as ECT and rTMS. Psychotherapeutic approaches, like CBT, are used for MDD and TRD patients. We also face competition from 501(c)(3) non-profit medical research organizations, including the Usona Institute. In March 2024, Usona Institute announced the launch of its Phase 3 trial evaluating the efficacy and safety of psilocybin 25 mg in as a treatment for major depressive disorder, which is expected to enroll approximately 240 adult patients. Usona has 26 clinical trial sites, continues to progress its Phase 3 trial and expects to complete the primary endpoint in its Phase 3 trial in April 2025 and the long-term follow-up portion of its Phase 3 trial in April 2026. Such non-profits may be willing to provide psilocybin-based products at cost or for free, undermining our potential market for COMP360. In addition, a number of for-profit biotechnology companies or institutions are specifically pursuing the development of psilocybin to treat mental health illnesses, including Cybin Inc. In March 2024, Cybin announced the design of its Phase 3 program for its deuterated psilocybin analog for the adjunctive treatment of major depressive disorder, which includes two Phase 3 trials and is expected to enroll approximately 550 adult patients. In November 2024, Cybin announced the initiation of its Phase 3 program. We are aware of other organizations or institutions evaluating the use of psilocybin in mental health and neurocognitive conditions. In addition, there are various companies exploring other psychedelic compounds for the treatment of mental health and neurocognitive conditions. Many of the pharmaceutical, biopharmaceutical and biotechnology companies with whom we may compete have established markets for their therapies and have substantially greater financial, technical, human and other resources than we do and may be better equipped to develop, manufacture and market superior products or therapies. In addition, many of these potential competitors have significantly greater experience than we have in undertaking non-clinical studies and human clinical trials of new therapeutic substances and in obtaining regulatory approvals of human therapeutic products. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining FDA, EMA or MHRA approval for alternative or superior products. In addition, many competitors have greater name recognition and more extensive collaborative relationships. Smaller and earlier-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large, established companies. An increasing number of companies are increasing their efforts in discovery of new psychedelic compounds. Patents and Other Intellectual and Proprietary Rights Obtaining, maintaining and defending global patents and other intellectual property (“IP”) rights, whether independently or in collaboration with our partners, are of key importance in the protection and commercialization of the Company’s innovative therapies and technology solutions. We shall continue to seek global patent, trademark, and trade secret protection of our innovations in the U.S., EU, UK, and other key jurisdictions. This includes pursuing patent protection for our novel high-purity polymorphic crystalline psilocybin and related manufacturing processes, pharmaceutical compositions, formulations, and methods of treatment of psychiatric and neurological indications, including TRD, MDD, PTSD, and anorexia. Upon regulatory approval in a particular jurisdiction, we will also seek to meaningfully protect our innovations by asserting available regulatory exclusivity including regulatory data protection and market exclusivity. For example, upon approval from the U.S. FDA, we may be entitled to five years of regulatory exclusivity for New Chemical Entity, or NCE, status and upon approval from the European Medicines Agency, or EMA, we may be entitled to ten years of regulatory exclusivity. We will defend our patents and other IP and proprietary rights as appropriate if and when we are subjected to third-party challenges (e.g., litigation, post-grant review, inter-partes review, oppositions). 30 Table of Contents Patents and Patent Applications Our patent portfolio related to COMP360 includes the following patents and published patent applications: Territory Patent Number/Application Number Subject Matter Expiration Date Corresponding Ex-U.S. Patents and Patent Applications or PCT National Stage Applications US 10,519,175 Methods of treating treatment-resistant depression ca.2038* Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Colombia, Eurasian Patent Organization, European Patent Office, Hong Kong, Indonesia, Israel, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Thailand, and South Africa. US 10,947,257 Oral dosage forms of crystalline psilocybin; Methods of treating major depressive disorder (MDD) ca.2038* US 10,954,259 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations; Method of treating MDD ca.2038* US 11,180,517 Method of treating treatment-resistant depression ca.2038* US 11,505,564 Method of manufacturing ca.2038* US 11,629,159 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038* US 11,851,451 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038* US 11,939,346 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038* US 18/433,051 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038 US 18/767,494 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038 US 18/989,682 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038 GB 2571696 Method of manufacturing ca. 2037* GB 2572023 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations; Medical uses (including for treatment-resistant depression); Method of manufacturing ca. 2038* GB 2576059 Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038* GB 2588505 Method of manufacturing ca. 2038* GB 2588506 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations; Method of manufacture ca. 2038* DE 202018006384 Crystalline psilocybin; Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2038* PCT WO/2020/212951 Methods of treating anxiety disorders and other conditions ca. 2040* Applications filed in Australia, Canada, China, European Patent Office, Hong Kong, Japan and Republic of Korea. US 11,564,935 Method of treating PTSD ca. 2040* US 11,738,035 Method of treating anorexia ca. 2040* US 11,865,126 Method of treating anxiety ca. 2040* US 18/522,440 Method of treating eating disorders ca. 2040* 31 Table of Contents PCT WO2020/212948 Methods of treating neurocognitive disorders and other conditions ca. 2040* Applications filed in Australia, Canada, China, European Patent Office, Hong Kong, Japan and Republic of Korea. US 17/604,606 Method of treating attention-deficit hyperactivity disorder, autism spectrum disorder, or chronic pain ca. 2040* PCT WO2020/212952 Methods of treating depression and other disorders ca. 2040* Applications filed in Australia, Canada, China, European Patent Office, Hong Kong, Japan, Republic of Korea and Taiwan. US 17/604,610 Method of treating depression ca. 2040* PCT WO2022/207746 Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2041* Applications filed in Taiwan, Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, Columbia, European Patent office, , Indonesia, Israel, Japan, Hong Kong, and Republic of Korea, Mexico, Malaysia, New Zealand, Philippines, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Singapore, Thailand, Vietnam, and South Africa. US 18/285,109 Pharmaceutical formulations ca. 2041* PCT WO 2023/86252 Redosing schedules for subjects with treatment resistant depression ca. 2042* Applications filed in Australia, Canada, China, European Patent Office, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, and Singapore. US 18/703,950 Redosing schedules for subjects with treatment resistant depression ca. 2042* PCT WO 2023/114097 Method of treating treatment resistant depression with psilocybin and serotonin reuptake inhibitor ca. 2042* Applications filed in U.S., Australia, Canada, China, European Patent Office, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, New Zealand, and Singapore. US 18/718,103 Method of treating treatment resistant depression with psilocybin and serotonin reuptake inhibitor ca. 2042* *In general, a U.S. patent, as well as most foreign patents, will expire after 20 years from the earliest effective filing date. In the U.S., it may be possible to extend the patent term beyond the 20 years by requesting patent term extension, or PTE, of patents that claim a product requiring regulatory approval prior to sale. PTE restores to a patent owner, patent term which was effectively “lost” due to regulatory review. Similar term extensions may be available outside of the U.S. Further, in the U.S., it may also be possible to extend beyond the 20-year patent term as a result of prosecution delays caused by the U.S. Patent and Trademark Office. U.S. Patent No 10,519,175, was granted on December 31, 2019, with claims directed to methods of treating treatment-resistant depression with oral dosage formulations of Compass’s high-purity crystalline psilocybin (including COMP360). Three Third Party Observations were previously filed during the pendency of the application, each considered by the Examiner and found to not be a barrier to patentability. A Petition for post-grant review of the patent was filed on February 21, 2020 and was dismissed on the merits on August 20, 2020. On December 15, 2021, Freedom to Operate, Inc., filed a petition for post-grant review of U.S. Patent No. 10,947,257. The patent owner’s response was filed on March 29, 2022. On June 22, 2022, the USPTO denied institution of the post-grant review. Freedom to Operate, Inc. filed a request for rehearing on July 22, 2022, and a request for Precedential opinion panel on August 16, 2022. The USPTO Board denied the request for Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) review on February 10, 2023. On May 23, 2023, the USPTO Board denied the request for rehearing. On December 22, 2021, Freedom to Operate, Inc., filed a petition for post-grant review of U.S. Patent No. 10,954,259. The patent owner’s response was filed on April 11, 2022. On June 22, 2022, the USPTO denied institution of the post-grant review. Freedom to Operate, Inc. filed a request for rehearing on July 22, 2022, and a request for Precedential opinion panel 32 Table of Contents on August 16, 2022. The USPTO Board denied the request for Precedential Opinion Panel (POP) review on February 10, 2023. On May 23, 2023, the USPTO Board denied the request for rehearing. UK patent, No GB2571696, was granted in May 2020 with claims directed to large scale manufacture of psilocybin, psilocybin made by said process and formulation comprising psilocybin made by said process. The Intention to Grant was sent in December 2019, and Third-Party Observations were filed in late January 2020, shortly before grant was originally scheduled. Grant of the patent was announced in the Patents Journal on May 27, 2020. This patent has an expiry date of October 8, 2037. On June 11, 2020, Kohn & Associates PLLC filed a request at the UK Intellectual Property Office to issue a post-grant opinion on the validity of the patent claims. On April 27, 2021, the agency issued a decision to refuse the request for an opinion finding that it was inappropriate in all the circumstances to issue such an opinion. No appeal to this decision was lodged within the required 28-day period. UK patent, No GB2572023, was granted in June 2020. This patent includes claims covering our crystalline psilocybin (including the form used in COMP360), pharmaceutical formulations of crystalline psilocybin, medical uses of crystalline psilocybin (including for treatment-resistant depression), and a method of manufacturing crystalline psilocybin. The Intention to Grant was sent in December 2019, and Third-Party Observations were filed in late January 2020. A notification of grant was mailed June 23, 2020, and grant was announced in the Patents Journal on July 22, 2020. This patent has an expiry date of June 28, 2038. On August 27, 2020, Freedom to Operate, Inc. filed a request at the UK Intellectual Property Office to issue a post-grant opinion on the validity of the patent claims. On July 28, 2021 a non-binding opinion was issued by the agency finding that granted claims 1, 3 and 10-20 are not inventive. We submitted an amendment to the patent claims and on November 5, 2021 the agency provided notice that the amended specification would be published for opposition in the Patents Journal on December 1, 2021. On December 17, 2021, the agency then issued a decision to not initiate revocation proceedings against the patent. On November 22, 2022, Porta Sophia filed a Third-Party Observation against international patent application WO2022/207746. On October 31, 2024, Porta Sophia filed a Third Party Submission against U.S. patent application 18/285,109, which is the U.S. national phase entry of WO2022/207746. Trademarks The Company has pursued protection for its trademarks across Classes 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 42, 44 or various combinations thereof. Our trademark portfolio includes active filings for the COMPASS, COMPASS PATHWAYS, C Design, MYPATHFINDER, CHANTERELLE, COMPASS PATHWAVES, NUFONDIS, and EMPAQUIST marks in the United States, European Union, and United Kingdom, as detailed in the chart below. The Company owns registrations for the COMPASS, COMPASS PATHWAYS, C Design, and MYPATHFINDER marks in the United States, European Union, and United Kingdom; and for the CHANTERELLE, COMPASS PATHWAVES, NUFONDIS and EMPAQUIST marks in the European Union and United Kingdom. Applications are pending for the CHANTERELLE, COMPASS PATHWAVES, NUFONDIS, and EMPAQUIST marks in the United States. The Company also owns trademark registrations and pending applications in other countries. Mark Territory Class(es) Trademark Application/Registration No. Filing/Registration Date Status COMPASS US 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 44 6648807 February 22, 2022 Registered EU 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 44 1568499 May 25, 2021 Registered UK 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 44 3476175 August 10, 2020 Registered COMPASS PATHWAYS US 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 44 6648818 February 22, 2022 Registered EU 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 44 1570415 June 1, 2021 Registered UK 5, 9, 10, 35, 41, 44 3476163 August 14, 2020 Registered 33 Table of Contents US 5, 35, 41, 42, 44 6836992 September 6, 2022 Registered US 9, 10 90801777 June 29, 2021 Pending EU 5, 41, 44 1644148 June 30, 2022 Registered UK 5, 41, 44 1644148 May 5, 2022 Registered MYPATHFINDER US 9, 42 97174167 December 15, 2021 Pending EU 9, 42 1685580 June 7, 2022 Pending UK 9, 42 1685580 December 15, 2022 Registered CHANTERELLE US 9, 42 97626719 October 11, 2022 Pending Government Regulation The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record-keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring and post-approval reporting of drugs. We, along with our vendors, contract research organizations and contract manufacturers, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical, manufacturing and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval of our product candidates. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals of drugs and ensuring subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations requires the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. In the United States, the FDA regulates drug products under the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, as amended, its implementing regulations and other laws. If we fail to comply with applicable FDA or other requirements at any time with respect to product development, clinical testing, approval or any other legal requirements relating to product manufacture, processing, handling, storage, quality control, safety, marketing, advertising, promotion, packaging, labeling, export, import, distribution, or sale, we may become subject to administrative or judicial sanctions or other legal consequences. These sanctions or consequences could include, among other things, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, issuance of clinical holds for ongoing studies, suspension or revocation of approved applications, warning or untitled letters, product withdrawals or recalls, product seizures, relabeling or repackaging, total or partial suspensions of manufacturing or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties or criminal prosecution. The process required by the FDA before our product candidates are approved as drugs for therapeutic indications and may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following: • Completion of extensive preclinical studies in accordance with applicable regulations, including studies conducted in accordance with good laboratory practice, or GLP, requirements; • Completion of the manufacture, under current Good Manufacturing Practices, or cGMP, conditions, of the drug substance and drug product that the sponsor intends to use in human clinical trials along with required analytical and stability testing; • Submission to the FDA of an investigational new drug application, or IND, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin; • Approval by an institutional review board, or IRB, or independent ethics committee at each clinical trial site before each trial may be initiated; • Performance of adequate and well-controlled clinical trials in accordance with applicable IND regulations, good clinical practice, or GCP, requirements and other clinical trial-related regulations to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product for each proposed indication; • Submission to the FDA of a New Drug Application, or NDA; • Payment of user fees for FDA review of the NDA; 34 Table of Contents • A determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA, to accept the filing for review; • Satisfactory completion of one or more FDA pre-approval inspections of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the drug will be produced to assess compliance with cGMP requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity; • Potentially, satisfactory completion of FDA audit of the clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the NDA; and • FDA review and approval of the NDA, including consideration of the views of any FDA advisory committee, prior to any commercial marketing or sale of the drug in the United States. Preclinical Studies and Clinical Trials for Drugs Before testing any drug in humans, the product candidate must undergo rigorous preclinical testing. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess safety and in some cases to establish the rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal and state regulation, including GLP requirements for safety/toxicology studies. The results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information and analytical data, must be submitted to the FDA as part of an IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before clinical trials may begin. Some long-term preclinical testing may continue after the IND is submitted. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises concerns or questions about the conduct of the clinical trial, including concerns that human research subjects will be exposed to unreasonable health risks, and imposes a full or partial clinical hold. FDA must notify the sponsor of the grounds for the hold and any identified deficiencies must be resolved before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND may result in the FDA not allowing clinical trials to commence or not allowing clinical trials to commence on the terms originally specified in the IND. A clinical hold can also be imposed once a trial has already begun, thereby halting the trial until the deficiencies articulated by FDA are corrected. The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the product candidate to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, who generally are physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control, in accordance with GCP requirements, which include the requirements that all research subjects provide their informed consent for their participation in any clinical trial. Clinical trials are conducted under protocols detailing, among other things, the objectives of the clinical trial, administration procedures, subject selection and exclusion criteria and the parameters and criteria to be used in monitoring safety and evaluating effectiveness. Each protocol, and any subsequent amendments to the protocol, must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. Furthermore, each clinical trial must be reviewed and approved by an IRB for each institution at which the clinical trial will be conducted to ensure that the risks to individuals participating in the clinical trials are minimized and are reasonable compared to the anticipated benefits. The IRB also approves the informed consent form that must be provided to each clinical trial subject or his or her legal representative and must monitor the clinical trial until completed. The FDA, the IRB, or the sponsor may suspend or discontinue a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable safety risk. There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trials to public registries. Information about clinical trials, including results for clinical trials other than Phase 1 investigations, must be submitted within specific time-frames for publication on www.ClinicalTrials.gov, a clinical trials database maintained by the National Institutes of Health. A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the United States may, but need not, obtain FDA authorization to conduct the clinical trial under an IND. If a foreign clinical trial is not conducted under an IND, FDA will nevertheless accept the results of the study in support of an NDA if the study was conducted in accordance with GCP requirements, and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Clinical trials to evaluate therapeutic indications to support NDAs for marketing approval are typically conducted in three sequential phases, which may overlap. • Phase 1— Phase 1 clinical trials involve initial introduction of the investigational product into healthy human volunteers or patients with the target disease or condition. These studies are typically designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism and distribution of the investigational product in humans, excretion, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence of effectiveness. 35 Table of Contents • Phase 2— Phase 2 clinical trials typically involve administration of the investigational product to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the drug’s potential efficacy, to determine the optimal dosages and administration schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. • Phase 3— Phase 3 clinical trials typically involve administration of the investigational product to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval and physician labeling. Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials or post-marketing studies, may be conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication and are commonly intended to generate additional safety data regarding use of the product in a clinical setting. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of NDA approval. Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA. Written IND safety reports must be submitted to the FDA and the investigators fifteen days after the trial sponsor determines the information qualifies for reporting for serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies or animal or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human volunteers and any clinically important increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. The sponsor must also notify the FDA of any unexpected fatal or life-threatening suspected adverse reaction as soon as possible but in no case later than seven calendar days after the sponsor’s initial receipt of the information. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal studies and must also develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the product candidate and finalize a process for manufacturing the drug product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and manufacturers must develop, among other things, methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final drug product. In addition, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life. US Marketing Approval for Drugs Assuming successful completion of the required clinical testing, the results of the preclinical studies and clinical trials, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacture, controls and proposed labeling, among other things, are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA package requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. An NDA is a request for approval to market a new drug for one or more specified indications and must contain proof of the drug’s safety and efficacy for the requested indications. The marketing application is required to include both negative and ambiguous results of preclinical studies and clinical trials, as well as positive findings. Data may come from company-sponsored clinical trials intended to test the safety and efficacy of a product’s use or from a number of alternative sources, including studies initiated by investigators. To support marketing approval, the data submitted must be sufficient in quality and quantity to establish the safety and efficacy of the investigational product to the satisfaction of the FDA. The FDA must approve an NDA before a drug may be marketed in the United States. The FDA reviews all submitted NDAs before it accepts them for filing and may request additional information rather than accepting the NDA for filing. The FDA must make a decision on accepting an NDA for filing within 60 days of receipt, and such decision could include a refusal to file by the FDA. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth substantive review of the NDA. The FDA reviews an NDA to determine, among other things, whether the drug is safe and effective for the indications sought and whether the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packaged or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, quality and purity. Under the goals and policies agreed to by the FDA under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act, or PDUFA, the FDA targets 10 months, from the filing date, in which to complete its initial review of a new molecular entity NDA and respond to the applicant, and six months from the filing date of a new molecular entity NDA for priority review. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard or priority NDAs, and the review process is often extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. Further, under PDUFA, as amended, each NDA must be accompanied by a substantial user fee. The FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. Fee waivers or reductions are available in certain circumstances, including a waiver of the application fee for the first application filed by a small business. In addition, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication. 36 Table of Contents The FDA also may require submission of a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, if it believes that a REMS is necessary to ensure that the benefits of the drug outweigh its risks. A REMS can include use of risk evaluation and mitigation strategies like medication guides, physician communication plans, assessment plans, and/or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries, or other risk-minimization tools. The FDA may refer an application for a novel drug to an advisory committee. An advisory committee is a panel of independent experts, including clinicians and other scientific experts, which reviews, evaluates and provides a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved and under what conditions. The FDA is not bound by the recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations carefully when making decisions. Before approving an NDA, the FDA typically will inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and are adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. In addition, before approving an NDA, the FDA may inspect one or more clinical trial sites to assure compliance with GCP and other requirements and the integrity of the clinical data submitted to the FDA. After evaluating the NDA and all related information, including the advisory committee recommendation, if any, and inspection reports regarding the manufacturing facilities and clinical trial sites, the FDA may issue an approval letter, or, in some cases, a complete response letter. A complete response letter generally contains a statement of specific conditions that must be met in order to secure final approval of the NDA and may require additional clinical or preclinical testing in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. Even with submission of this additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. If and when those conditions have been met to the FDA’s satisfaction, the FDA will typically issue an approval letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. Even if the FDA approves a product, depending on the specific risks to be addressed it may limit the approved indications for use of the product, require that contraindications, warnings or precautions be included in the product labeling, require that post-approval studies, including Phase 4 clinical trials, be conducted to further assess a drug’s safety after approval, require testing and surveillance programs to monitor the product after commercialization, or impose other conditions, including distribution and use restrictions or other risk management mechanisms under a REMS, which can materially affect the potential market and profitability of the product. The FDA may prevent or limit further marketing of a product based on the results of post-marketing studies or surveillance programs. After approval, some types of changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications, manufacturing changes, and additional labeling claims, are subject to further testing requirements and FDA review and approval. Expedited Development and Review Programs for Drugs The FDA maintains several programs intended to facilitate and expedite development and review of new drugs to address unmet medical needs in the treatment of serious or life-threatening diseases or conditions. These programs include Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval, and the purpose of these programs is to either expedite the development or review of important new drugs to get them to patients more quickly than standard FDA review timelines typically permit. A drug is eligible for Fast Track designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and demonstrates the potential to address unmet medical needs for such disease or condition. Fast Track designation provides increased opportunities for sponsor interactions with the FDA during preclinical and clinical development, in addition to the potential for rolling review once a marketing application is filed. Rolling review means that the agency may review portions of the marketing application before the sponsor submits the complete application. In addition, a drug may be eligible for Breakthrough Therapy designation if it is intended to treat a serious or life-threatening disease or condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the drug may demonstrate substantial improvement over existing therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints, such as substantial treatment effects observed early in clinical development. Breakthrough Therapy designation provides all the features of Fast Track designation in addition to intensive guidance on an efficient drug development program, and FDA organizational commitment to expedited development, including involvement of senior managers and experienced review staff in a cross-disciplinary review, where appropriate. Any product submitted to the FDA for approval, including a product with Fast Track or Breakthrough Therapy designation, may also be eligible for additional FDA programs intended to expedite the review and approval process, including Priority Review designation and Accelerated Approval. A product is eligible for Priority Review designation, once an NDA or BLA is submitted, if the drug that is the subject of the marketing application has the potential to provide a significant 37 Table of Contents improvement in safety or effectiveness in the treatment, diagnosis or prevention of a serious disease or condition. Under priority review, the FDA’s goal date to take action on the marketing application is six months compared to ten months for a standard review. Products are eligible for Accelerated Approval if they can be shown to have an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or an effect on an intermediate clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality, which is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit, taking into account the severity, rarity, or prevalence of the condition and the availability or lack of alternative treatments. Accelerated Approval is usually contingent on a sponsor’s agreement to conduct additional post-approval studies to verify and describe the product’s clinical benefit. Under the Food and Drug Omnibus Reform Act of 2022, or FDORA, the FDA is permitted to require, as appropriate, that such trials be underway prior to approval or within a specific time period after the date of approval for a product granted accelerated approval. Sponsors are also required to send updates to the FDA every 180 days on the status of such studies, including progress toward enrollment targets, and the FDA must promptly post this information publicly. Under FDORA, the FDA has increased authority for expedited procedures to withdraw approval of a drug or indication approved under accelerated approval if, for example, the sponsor fails to conduct such studies in a timely manner and send the necessary updates to the FDA, or if a confirmatory trial fails to verify the predicted clinical benefit of the product. In addition, the FDA generally requires, as a condition for Accelerated Approval, that all advertising and promotional materials intended for dissemination or publication within 120 days of marketing approval be submitted to the agency for review during the pre-approval review period. After the 120-day period has passed, all advertising and promotional materials must be submitted at least 30 days prior to the intended time of initial dissemination or publication. Even if a product qualifies for one or more of these programs, the FDA may later decide that the product no longer meets the conditions for qualification or the time period for FDA review or approval may not be shortened. Furthermore, Fast Track designation, Breakthrough Therapy designation, Priority Review and Accelerated Approval do not change the scientific or medical standards for approval or the quality of evidence necessary to support approval, though they may expedite the development or review process. Orphan Designation Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or 200,000 or more individuals in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making a drug available in the United States for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales of the product. Orphan drug designation must be requested before submitting an NDA. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in or shorten the duration of the regulatory review and approval process. Orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. If a drug that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications to market the same drug for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the drug with orphan exclusivity. Competitors, however, may receive approval of different drugs for the indication for which the orphan drug has exclusivity or obtain approval for the same drug but for a different indication for which the orphan drug has exclusivity. Orphan drug exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our therapeutic candidates for seven years if a competitor obtains approval of the same drug as defined by the FDA or if our therapeutic candidate is determined to be contained within the competitor’s drug for the same indication or disease. If a drug designated as an orphan drug receives marketing approval for an indication broader than what is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug status in the European Union has similar, but not identical, benefits. US Post-Approval Requirements for Drugs Drugs manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to recordkeeping, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, reporting of adverse experiences with the product, complying with promotion and advertising requirements, which include restrictions on promoting products for unapproved uses or patient populations (known as “off-label use”) and limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. Although physicians may prescribe legally available products for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such uses. 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 38 Table of Contents subject to significant liability, including investigation by federal and state authorities. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use or first publication. Further, if there are any modifications to the drug, including changes in indications, labeling or manufacturing processes or facilities, the applicant may be required to submit and obtain FDA approval of a new NDA or NDA supplement, which may require the development of additional data or preclinical studies and clinical trials. The FDA may impose a number of post-approval requirements as a condition of approval of an NDA. For example, the FDA may require post-market testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization. In addition, drug manufacturers and other entities involved in the manufacture and distribution of approved drugs, and those supplying products, ingredients, and components of them, are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with ongoing regulatory requirements, including cGMPs, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements. I n addition, the Drug Supply Chain Security Act, or DSCSA, was enacted in 2013 with the aim of building an electronic system to identify and trace certain prescription drugs and biologics distributed in the United States. The DSCSA mandates phased-in and resource-intensive obligations for pharmaceutical manufacturers, wholesale distributors, and dispensers over a 10-year period that culminated in November 2023. The FDA established a one-year stabilization period until November 2024 for trading partners to continue to build and validate interoperable systems and processes to meet certain requirements of the DSCSA. In late 2024, the FDA announced it is allowing a further exemption period for eligible trading partners who have successfully completed or made documented efforts to complete data connections with their immediate trading partners, but still face challenges exchanging data. The exemption period for eligible manufacturers and repackagers now extends until May 27, 2025. The DSCSA requirements include the quarantine and prompt investigation of a suspect product, to determine if it is illegitimate, notifying trading partners and the FDA of any illegitimate product, and compliance with product tracking and tracing requirements. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated and often require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP requirements and impose reporting and documentation requirements upon the sponsor and any third-party manufacturers that the sponsor may decide to use. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain cGMP compliance. Failure to comply with statutory and regulatory requirements may subject a manufacturer to legal or regulatory action, such as warning letters, suspension of manufacturing, product seizures, injunctions, civil penalties or criminal prosecution. There is also a continuing, annual prescription drug product program user fee. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with a product, including adverse events of unanticipated severity or frequency, or with manufacturing processes, or failure to comply with regulatory requirements, may result in revisions to the approved labeling to add new safety information, requirements for post-market studies or clinical trials to assess new safety risks, or imposition of distribution or other restrictions under a REMS. Other potential consequences include, among other things: • Restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls; • The issuance of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product; • Fines, warning letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials; • Refusal of the FDA to approve applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of product approvals; • Product seizure or detention, or refusal to permit the import or export of products; • Injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; and • Consent decrees, corporate integrity agreements, debarment or exclusion from federal healthcare programs; or mandated modification of promotional materials and labeling and issuance of corrective information. Controlled Substances The federal Controlled Substances Act of 1970, or CSA, and its implementing regulations establish a “closed system” of regulations for controlled substances. The CSA imposes registration, security, recordkeeping and reporting, storage, manufacturing, distribution, importation and other requirements under the oversight of the DEA. The DEA is the federal 39 Table of Contents agency responsible for regulating controlled substances, and requires those individuals or entities that manufacture, import, export, distribute, research, or dispense controlled substances to comply with the regulatory requirements in order to prevent the diversion of controlled substances to illicit channels of commerce. The DEA categorizes controlled substances into one of five schedules — Schedule I, II, III, IV or V — with varying qualifications for listing in each schedule. Schedule I substances by definition have a high potential for abuse, have no currently accepted medical use in treatment in the United States and lack accepted safety for use under medical supervision. Pharmaceutical products having a currently accepted medical use that are otherwise approved for marketing may be listed as Schedule II, III, IV or V substances, with Schedule II substances presenting the highest potential for abuse and physical or psychological dependence, and Schedule V substances presenting the lowest relative potential for abuse and dependence. COMP360, if approved in the United States, will require rescheduling by the DEA before it can be marketed. Facilities that manufacture, distribute, import or export any controlled substance must register annually with the DEA. The DEA registration is specific to the particular location, activity(ies) and controlled substance schedule(s). The DEA inspects all manufacturing facilities to review security, recordkeeping, reporting and handling prior to issuing a controlled substance registration. The specific security requirements vary by the type of business activity and the schedule and quantity of controlled substances handled. The most stringent requirements apply to manufacturers of Schedule I and Schedule II substances. Required security measures commonly include background checks on employees and physical control of controlled substances through storage in approved vaults, safes and cages, and through use of alarm systems and surveillance cameras. Once registered, manufacturing facilities must maintain records documenting the manufacture, receipt and distribution of all controlled substances. Manufacturers must submit periodic reports to the DEA of the distribution of Schedule I and II controlled substances, Schedule III narcotic substances, and other designated substances. Registrants must also report any controlled substance thefts or significant losses, and must obtain authorization to destroy or dispose of controlled substances. Imports of Schedule I and II controlled substances for commercial purposes are generally restricted to substances not already available from a domestic supplier or where there is not adequate competition among domestic suppliers. In addition to an importer or exporter registration, importers and exporters must obtain a permit for every import or export of a Schedule I and II substance or Schedule III, IV and V narcotic, and submit import or export declarations for Schedule III, IV and V non-narcotics. In some cases, Schedule III non-narcotic substances may be subject to the import/export permit requirement, if necessary, to ensure that the United States complies with its obligations under international drug control treaties. For drugs manufactured in the United States, the DEA establishes annually an aggregate quota for the amount of substances within Schedules I and II that may be manufactured or produced in the United States based on the DEA’s estimate of the quantity needed to meet legitimate medical, scientific, research and industrial needs. The quotas apply equally to the manufacturing of the active pharmaceutical ingredient and production of dosage forms. The DEA may adjust aggregate production quotas a few times per year, and individual manufacturing or procurement quotas from time to time during the year, although the DEA has substantial discretion in whether or not to make such adjustments for individual companies. The states also maintain separate controlled substance laws and regulations, including licensing, recordkeeping, security, distribution, and dispensing requirements. State authorities, including boards of pharmacy, regulate use of controlled substances in each state. Failure to maintain compliance with applicable requirements, particularly as manifested in the loss or diversion of controlled substances, can result in enforcement action that could have a material adverse effect on our business, operations and financial condition. The DEA may seek civil penalties, refuse to renew necessary registrations, or initiate proceedings to revoke those registrations. In certain circumstances, violations could lead to criminal prosecution. U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act The U.S. Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, to which we are subject, prohibits corporations and individuals from engaging in certain activities to obtain or retain business or to influence a person working in an official capacity. It is illegal to pay, offer to pay or authorize the payment of anything of value to any foreign government official, government staff member, political party or political candidate in an attempt to obtain or retain business or to otherwise influence a person working in an official capacity. Regulation and Procedures Governing Approval of Medicinal Products in the European Union In order to market any product outside of the United States, a company must also comply with numerous and varying regulatory requirements of other countries and jurisdictions regarding quality, safety and efficacy and governing, among other things, clinical trials, marketing authorization, commercial sales and distribution of products. Whether or not it obtains FDA approval for a product, an applicant will need to obtain the necessary approvals by the comparable foreign regulatory authorities before it can initiate clinical trials or marketing of the product in those countries or jurisdictions. Specifically, the 40 Table of Contents process governing approval of medicinal products in the EU generally follows the same lines as in the United States, although the approval of a medicinal product in the United States is no guarantee of approval of the same product in the EU, either at all or within the same timescale as approval may be granted in the United States. It entails satisfactory completion of pharmaceutical development, non-clinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of the medicinal product for each proposed indication. It also requires the submission to relevant competent authorities for clinical trials authorization and subsequently of a marketing authorization application, or MAA, before the product can be marketed and sold in the EU or any of its Member States. If we fail to comply with applicable requirements, we may be subject to withdrawal of regulatory approvals, product recalls, seizure of products, operating restrictions and criminal prosecution. Clinical Trial Approval In the EU, an applicant for authorization of a clinical trial must obtain prior approval from the national competent authority of the EU Member States in which the clinical trial is to be conducted. Furthermore, the applicant may only start a clinical trial at a specific study site after the relevant independent ethics committee has issued a favorable opinion. In April 2014, the EU adopted the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, which replaced the previous Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20/EC on January 31, 2022 and overhauls the system of approvals for clinical trials in the EU. Specifically, the Clinical Trials Regulation, which is directly applicable in all EU Member States (meaning that no national implementing legislation in each EU Member State is required), aims at simplifying and streamlining the approval of clinical trials in the EU. For instance, the Clinical Trials Regulation provides for a streamlined application procedure via a single-entry point (instead of submitting applications separately to each national competent authority and ethics committee in the Member States in which the trial will be conducted) and strictly defined deadlines for the assessment of clinical trial applications. The Clinical Trials Regulation also makes it more efficient for EU Member States to evaluate and authorize applications together, via the Clinical Trials Information System. The transitory provisions of the Clinical Trials Regulation provide that, by January 31, 2025, all ongoing clinical trials must have transitioned to the Clinical Trials Regulation. Marketing Authorization To obtain a marketing authorization for a medicinal product in the European Economic Area (comprised of the EU Member States plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein), or EEA, an applicant must submit an MAA, either under a centralized procedure administered by the EMA or one of the procedures administered by competent authorities in the EU Member States (decentralized procedure, national procedure, or mutual recognition procedure). A marketing authorization may be granted only to an applicant established in the EEA. The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single marketing authorization by the European Commission that is valid throughout the EEA and is mandatory for certain products, including products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV, AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative disorders, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions, and viral diseases. For those products for which the use of the centralized procedure is not mandatory, pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, applicants may elect to use the centralized procedure where either the product contains a new active substance indicated for the treatment of diseases other than those on the mandatory list, where the applicant can show that the product constitutes a significant therapeutic, scientific or technical innovation, or for which a centralized authorization would be in the interest of public health. Our investigational COMP360 psilocybin treatment, as a new active substance indicated for the treatment of treatment-resistant depression, will have the option to be filed through the centralized procedure. Under the centralized procedure, the Committee for Medicinal Products for Human use, or the CHMP, which is the EMA’s committee that is responsible for human medicines, is responsible for conducting the assessment of whether a medicine meets the required quality, safety and efficacy requirements, and whether it has a positive risk/benefit profile. Under the centralized procedure, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA is 210 days from the receipt of a valid MAA, excluding clock stops when additional information or written or oral explanation is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions asked by the CHMP. Clock stops may extend the timeframe of evaluation of an MAA considerably beyond 210 days. Where the CHMP gives a positive opinion, it provides the opinion together with supporting documentation to the European Commission, who make the final decision to grant a marketing authorization. Within 67 days from the date of the CHMP opinion, the European Commission will adopt its final decision on the MAA. Accelerated evaluation may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product is of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts such a request, the timeframe of 210 days for assessment will be reduced to 150 days (excluding clock stops), but it is possible that the CHMP may revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it determines that the application is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment. Now that the UK (which comprises Great Britain and Northern Ireland) has left the EU, Great Britain is no longer covered by EU centralized marketing authorizations. On January 1, 2024, a new international recognition framework was put 41 Table of Contents in place by the MHRA, under which the MHRA may have regard to decisions on the approval of marketing authorizations made by the EMA and certain other regulators. The MHRA also has the power to have regard to marketing authorizations approved in EU Member States through decentralized or mutual recognition procedures with a view to more quickly granting a marketing authorization in the United Kingdom. The decentralized marketing authorization procedure allows an applicant to apply for simultaneous authorization in more than one EU Member State of medicinal products that have not yet been authorized in any EU Member State and that do not fall within the mandatory scope of the centralized procedure. The mutual recognition procedure is based on the acceptance by the competent authorities of the EU Member States of the marketing authorization of a medicinal product by the competent authorities of another EU Member State. The holder of a national marketing authorization may submit an application to the competent authority of an EU Member State requesting that this authority recognize the marketing authorization delivered by the competent authority of another EU Member State. PRIME Scheme In March 2016, the EMA launched a scheme that is intended to reinforce early dialogue with, and regulatory support from, the EMA in order to stimulate innovation, optimize development and enable accelerated assessment of Priority Medicines, or PRIME. It is intended to build upon the scientific advice scheme and accelerated assessment procedure offered by the EMA. The scheme is voluntary and eligibility criteria must be met for a medicine to qualify for PRIME. The PRIME scheme is open to medicines under development and for which the applicant intends to apply for a MAA through the centralized procedure. Eligible products must target conditions for which there is an unmet medical need (there is no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment in the EU or, if there is, the new medicine will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new therapy methods or improving existing ones. Applicants will typically be at the exploratory clinical trial phase of development, and will have preliminary clinical evidence in patients to demonstrate the promising activity of the medicine and its potential to address to a significant extent an unmet medical need. In exceptional cases, applicants from the academic sector or SMEs (small and medium sized enterprises) may submit an eligibility request at an earlier stage of development if compelling non-clinical data in a relevant model provides early evidence of promising activity, and first in man studies indicate adequate exposure for the desired pharmacotherapeutic effects and tolerability. If a medicine is selected for the PRIME scheme, the EMA: • appoints a rapporteur from the CHMP or from the Committee for Advanced Therapies (CAT) to provide continuous support and to build up knowledge of the medicine in advance of the filing of an MAA; • issues guidance on the applicant’s overall development plan and regulatory strategy; • organizes a kick-off meeting with the rapporteur and experts from relevant EMA committees and working groups; • provides a dedicated EMA contact person; and • provides scientific advice at key development milestones, involving additional stakeholders, such as health technology assessment bodies and patients, as needed. Medicines that are selected for the PRIME scheme are also expected to benefit from the EMA’s accelerated assessment procedure at the time of application for marketing authorization. Where, during the course of development, a medicine no longer meets the eligibility criteria, support under the PRIME scheme may be withdrawn. Orphan Designation Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000 and Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 provide that a product can be designated as an orphan medicinal product by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish that: (1) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (i) such condition affects no more than five in ten thousand persons in the EU when the application is made, or (ii) it is unlikely that the marketing of the product in the EU, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would generate sufficient return to justify the necessary investment in its development; and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU or, if such method exists, the product would be of significant benefit compared to products available for that condition. 42 Table of Contents An orphan designation provides a number of benefits in the EU, including fee reductions, regulatory assistance and the ability to apply for a centralized marketing authorization. The application for orphan designation must be submitted before the application for marketing authorization. Orphan designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. The grant of a marketing authorization for an orphan medicinal product leads to a ten-year period of market exclusivity. During this market exclusivity period, neither the EMA nor the European Commission or competent authorities of the Member States can accept an application or grant a marketing authorization for the same therapeutic indication in respect of a “similar medicinal product”. A “similar medicinal product” is defined as a medicinal product containing a similar active substance or substances as contained in an authorized orphan medicinal product, and which is intended for the same therapeutic indication. The market exclusivity period for the authorized therapeutic indication may, however, be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example because the product is sufficiently profitable not to justify market exclusivity. There are also limited derogations from the ten-year period of market exclusivity pursuant to which marketing authorization may be granted for a similar medicinal product in the same therapeutic indication. These are where: (i) the second applicant can establish that although their product is similar to the orphan medicinal product already authorized, the second product is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior; (ii) the marketing authorization holder for the authorized orphan product consents to the second medicinal product application; or (iii) the marketing authorization holder for the authorized orphan product cannot supply enough orphan medicinal product. Pediatric Development In the EU, companies developing a new medicinal product must agree upon a pediatric investigation plan, or PIP, with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee, or PDCO, and must conduct pediatric clinical trials in accordance with that PIP unless the EMA has granted a product-specific waiver, a class waiver, or a deferral for one or more of the measures included in the PIP. This requirement also applies when a company wants to add a new indication, pharmaceutical form or route of administration for a medicine that is already authorized. The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the product for which marketing authorization is being sought. The MAA for the product must include the results of pediatric clinical trials conducted in accordance with the PIP, unless a waiver applies, or a deferral has been granted by the PDCO of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures of the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults, in which case the pediatric clinical trials must be completed at a later date. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when this data is not needed or appropriate because the product is likely to be ineffective or unsafe in children, the disease or condition for which the product is intended occurs only in adult populations, or when the product does not represent a significant therapeutic benefit over existing treatments for pediatric patients. Products that are granted a marketing authorization with the results of the pediatric clinical trials conducted in accordance with the PIP are eligible for a six-month extension of the protection under a supplementary protection certificate or SPC (provided an application for such extension is made at the same time as filing the SPC application for the product, or at any point up to two years before the SPC expires), even where the trial results are negative. In the case of orphan medicinal products, a two year extension of the orphan market exclusivity may be available. This pediatric reward is subject to specific conditions and is not automatically available when data in compliance with the PIP are developed and submitted. Data and Market Exclusivity In the EU, innovative medicinal products approved on the basis of a complete and independent data package qualify for eight years of data exclusivity upon grant of a marketing authorization and an additional two years of market exclusivity pursuant to Regulation (EC) No. 726/2004, as amended, and Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended. Data exclusivity prevents generic and biosimilar applicants from referencing the innovator’s preclinical and clinical trial data contained in the dossier of the reference product when applying for a marketing authorization for a period of eight years from the date on which the reference product was first authorized in the EU. During the additional two-year period of market exclusivity, a generic or biosimilar marketing authorization application can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced, but no generic or biosimilar medicinal product can be marketed until the expiration of the market exclusivity period. The overall 10-year period will be extended to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those 10 years, the marketing authorization holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to authorization, is held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. There is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EMA to be an innovative medicinal product, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. Even if a product is considered to be an innovative medicinal product so that the innovator gains the prescribed period of data exclusivity, another company may market another version of the product if such company obtained marketing authorization based on an MAA with a complete and independent data package of pharmaceutical tests, preclinical tests and clinical trials. 43 Table of Contents Periods of Authorization and Renewals A marketing authorization is valid for five years, in principle, and it may be renewed after five years on the basis of a re-evaluation of the risk benefit balance by the EMA or by the competent authority of the authorizing EU Member State. Once renewed, the marketing authorization is valid for an unlimited period, unless the European Commission or the competent authority decides, on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one additional five-year renewal period. Any authorization that is not followed by the placement of the product on the EEA market (in the case of the centralized procedure) or on the market of the authorizing EU Member State (for a national procedure) within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause). Controlled Drugs Classification In the UK, psilocybin and psilocin are considered Class A drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971, as amended, and as Schedule 1 drugs under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001, as amended. Class A drugs are considered to be the most potentially harmful, and have the highest level of control exerted over them under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. Similarly, Schedule 1 of the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001 lists those drugs to which the most restrictive controls apply: they are considered to have no legitimate or medicinal use, and can only be imported, exported, produced, supplied and the like under a license issued by the UK Government’s Home Office. If and when granted a marketing authorization by the MHRA in respect of the UK, psilocybin would still remain a Schedule 1 drug unless and until rescheduled by the UK Government’s Home Office. Unless and until psilocybin is rescheduled under the Misuse of Drugs Regulations 2001, and unless a statutory exemption was to be passed for COMP360 following the grant of a UK marketing authorization and before rescheduling, any prescribing doctors in the UK would require a Home Office license to prescribe COMP360, and similarly any patients to whom COMP360 was prescribed would require a Home Office license to possess COMP360. There can be no guarantee that such Home Office licenses would be granted or that rescheduling would be successful. The position in the Member States of the EU is not harmonized: Member States have implemented the relevant UN Conventions (the Single Convention of Narcotic Drugs 1961 and the Convention on Psychotropic Substances 1971) into their national legislation, which has led to differences in how controlled substances are regulated in different countries of the EU. It is therefore important to determine at a national level whether a substance is controlled and to comply with the applicable legal requirements. If we are successful in obtaining a marketing authorization in key EU Member States, it is likely that rescheduling of psilocybin will also be required to enable prescribing. Regulatory Requirements After Marketing Authorization Following approval, the holder of the marketing authorization is required to comply with a range of requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of the medicinal product. These include compliance with the EU’s stringent pharmacovigilance or safety reporting rules, pursuant to which post-authorization studies and additional monitoring obligations can be imposed. The holder of a marketing authorization must establish and maintain a pharmacovigilance system and appoint an individual qualified person for pharmacovigilance, who is responsible for oversight of that system. Key obligations include expedited reporting of suspected serious adverse reactions and submission of periodic safety update reports, or PSURs. In addition, all new MAAs must include a risk management plan, or RMP, describing the risk management system that the company will put in place to document measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the marketing authorization. Such risk-minimization measures or post-authorization obligations may include additional safety monitoring, more frequent submission of PSURs, or the conduct of additional clinical trials or post-authorization safety studies. RMPs and PSURs are routinely available to third parties requesting access, subject to limited redactions. Furthermore, the manufacturing of authorized products, for which a separate manufacturer’s license is mandatory, must also be conducted in strict compliance with the applicable EU laws, regulations and guidance, including Directive 2001/83/EC, Directive (EU) 2017/1572, Regulation (EC) No 726/2004 and the European Commission Guidelines for Good Manufacturing Practice. These requirements include compliance with the EU cGMP standards which mandate the methods, facilities and controls used in manufacturing, processing and packing of products to assure their safety and identity. Finally, the marketing and promotion of authorized products, including industry-sponsored continuing medical education and advertising directed toward the prescribers of products, are strictly regulated in the EU under Directive 2001/83/EC, as amended. The advertising of prescription-only medicines to the general public is not permitted in the EU, or in the UK under the Human Medicines Regulations 2012. Although general requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products 44 Table of Contents are established under EU Directive 2001/83/EC as amended, the details are governed by regulations in each EU Member State and can differ from one country to another. The aforementioned EU rules are generally applicable in the EEA (which consists of the EU Member States plus Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein). Reform of the Regulatory Framework in the European Union The European Commission introduced legislative proposals in April 2023 that, if implemented, will replace the current regulatory framework in the EU for all medicines (including those for rare diseases and for children). The European Commission has provided the legislative proposals to the European Parliament and the European Council for their review and approval, and, in April 2024 the European Parliament proposed amendments to the legislative proposals. Once the European Commission’s legislative proposals are approved (with or without amendment), they will be adopted into EU law. Brexit and the Regulatory Framework in the United Kingdom The UK formally left the EU (commonly referred to as “Brexit”) on January 31, 2020 and the EU and the UK have concluded a trade and cooperation agreement, or TCA, which was provisionally applicable since January 1, 2021 and has been formally applicable since May 1, 2021. The TCA includes specific provisions concerning pharmaceuticals, which include the mutual recognition of GMP, inspections of manufacturing facilities for medicinal products and GMP documents issued, but does not provide for wholesale mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical regulations. At present, the UK has implemented EU legislation on the marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products through the Human Medicines Regulations 2012 (as amended) (under the Northern Ireland Protocol, the EU regulatory framework with respect to medicines continued to apply in Northern Ireland for a period following Brexit). Except in respect of the EU Clinical Trials Regulation, the regulatory regime in the UK therefore largely aligns with EU regulations, however it is possible that these regimes will diverge more significantly in future now that the UK’s regulatory system is independent from the EU and the TCA does not provide for mutual recognition of UK and EU pharmaceutical legislation. However, notwithstanding that there is no wholesale recognition of EU pharmaceutical legislation under the TCA, under a new international recognition procedure mentioned above which was put in place by the MHRA on January 1, 2024, the MHRA may take into account decisions on the approval of a marketing authorization from the EMA (and certain other regulators) when considering an application for a the UK marketing authorization. On February 27, 2023, the UK government and the European Commission announced a political agreement in principle to replace the Northern Ireland Protocol with a new set of arrangements, known as the “Windsor Framework”. The Windsor Framework was approved by the EU-UK Joint Committee on March 24, 2023, and the medicines aspects of the Windsor Framework have applied since January 1, 2025. This new framework fundamentally changes the previous system under the Northern Ireland Protocol, including with respect to the regulation of medicinal products in the UK. In particular, the MHRA is now responsible for approving all medicinal products destined for the UK market (i.e., Great Britain and Northern Ireland), and the EMA no longer has any role in approving medicinal products destined for Northern Ireland under the EU centralized procedure. A single UK-wide marketing authorization will be granted by the MHRA for all novel medicinal products to be sold in the UK, enabling products to be sold in a single pack and under a single authorization throughout the UK. In addition, the new arrangements require all medicines placed on the UK market to be labelled “UK only”, indicating they are not for sale in the EU. Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and markets in other countries, sales of any psilocybin treatment for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend, in part, on the availability of coverage and reimbursement for our products from third-party payors, such as government health care programs (e.g., Medicare, Medicaid), managed care providers, private health insurers, health maintenance organizations, and other organizations. These third-party payors decide which medications they will pay for and will establish reimbursement levels. The availability of coverage and extent of reimbursement by governmental and other third-party payors is essential for most patients to be able to afford treatments such as novel therapies. In the United States, the principal decisions about reimbursement for new medicines are typically made by the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, which is a part of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS. CMS decides whether and to what extent our products will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare and private payors tend to follow CMS to a substantial degree. Factors payors consider in determining reimbursement are based on whether the product is: • a covered benefit under its health plan; 45 Table of Contents • safe, effective and medically necessary; • appropriate for the specific patient; • cost-effective; and • neither experimental nor investigational. Our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates, whether as a single agent or combination therapy, will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for our products and related treatments will be available from third-party payors. Moreover, a payor’s decision to provide coverage for a 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 price levels sufficient to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. No uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exist among third-party payors in the United States. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for our products can differ significantly from payor to payor. The process for determining whether a payor will provide coverage for a product may be separate from the process for setting the reimbursement rate that the payor will pay for the product. One payor’s determination to provide coverage for a medical product or service does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage for the medical product or service, or will provide coverage at an adequate reimbursement rate. Third-party payors may also limit coverage to specific products on an approved list, or formulary, which might not include all of the FDA-approved products for a particular indication. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover or not to separately reimburse for our medical products or therapies using our products could reduce physician utilization of our products once approved and have a material adverse effect on our sales, results of operations and financial condition. If there is coverage for our product candidates, or therapies using our product candidates by a third-party payor, the resulting reimbursement payment rates may not be adequate or may require co-payments that patients find unacceptably high. We cannot be sure that coverage and reimbursement in the United States will be available for our current or future product candidates, or for any procedures using such product candidates, and any reimbursement that may become available may not be adequate or may be decreased or eliminated in the future. Further, if we or our collaborators develop therapies for use with our product candidates, we, or our collaborators, will be required to obtain coverage and reimbursement for these therapies separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement we seek for our product candidates, once approved. Further, third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price and examining the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of medical products and services, in addition to their safety and efficacy. In order to secure coverage and reimbursement for any product candidate that might be approved for sale, we may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of such product, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA or comparable regulatory approvals. Additionally, we may also need to provide discounts to purchasers, private health plans or government healthcare programs. Our product candidates may nonetheless not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. If third-party payors do not consider a product to be cost-effective compared to other available therapies, they may not cover the product, after approval, as a benefit under their plans or, if they do, the level of payment may not be sufficient to allow a company to sell its products at a profit. A decision by a third-party payor not to cover a product could reduce physician utilization once the product is approved and have a material adverse effect on sales, our operations and financial condition. We expect to experience pricing pressures from third-party payors in connection with the potential sale of any of our product candidates. Lastly, in some foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing vary widely from country to country. For example, in the EU, pricing and reimbursement schemes vary widely from country to country. Some EU Member States provide that products may be marketed only after a reimbursement price has been agreed. Some EU Member States may require the completion of additional studies that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies (so called health technology assessments) in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. For example, EU Member States have the option to restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. EU Member States may approve a specific price for a product or may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Approaches between EU Member States are diverging. For example, in France, effective market access will be supported by agreements with hospitals and products may be reimbursed by the Social Security Fund. The price of medicines is negotiated 46 Table of Contents with the Economic Committee for Health Products, or CEPS. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our product candidates. Other EU Member States allow companies to fix their own prices for products, but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. Recently, many countries in the EU have increased the level of discounts required on pharmaceuticals and these efforts could continue as countries attempt to manage health care expenditures, especially in light of the severe fiscal and debt crises experienced by many countries in the EU. The downward pressure on health care costs in general, particularly prescription products, has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations, and pricing negotiations may continue after reimbursement has been obtained. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel trade (arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States) can further reduce prices. Acceptance of any medicinal product for reimbursement may come with cost, use and often volume restrictions, which again can vary by country. In addition, results-based rules of reimbursement may apply. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for pharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products, if approved in those countries. Historically, products launched in the EU do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower. Notwithstanding any of the above, as Schedule I substances under the Controlled Substances Act, psilocybin and psilocin are currently deemed to have no accepted medical use and therapies that use psilocybin or psilocin are currently precluded from reimbursement in the United States. Other Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements Healthcare providers, physicians, and third-party payors will play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain marketing approval. Our business operations and any current or future arrangements with third-party payors, healthcare providers and physicians may expose us to broadly applicable federal and state fraud and abuse laws, as well as other healthcare laws and regulations. These laws may impact, among other things, our business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, as well as market, sell and distribute the psilocybin therapies for which we obtain approval. In addition, we may be subject to health information privacy regulation by both the federal government and the states in which we conduct our business. In the United States the laws that may affect our ability to operate include, among others: • The federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons and entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, receiving, offering or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe, or rebate), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce, or in return for, either the referral of an individual, or the purchase, lease, order, arrangement or recommendation of any good, facility, item or service for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare and Medicaid. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. Further, courts have found that if “one purpose” of remuneration is to induce referrals, the federal Anti-Kickback Statute is violated. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute or specific intent to violate it to have committed a violation. Violations are subject to significant administrative, civil and criminal fines and penalties for each violation, plus up to three times the remuneration involved, imprisonment, and exclusion from government healthcare programs. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act, or FCA, or federal civil money penalties statute. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution; but the exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and require strict compliance in order to offer protection; • The federal civil and criminal false claims laws, such as the FCA, which prohibit, among other things, individuals or entities from knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented claims for payment or approval from Medicare, Medicaid, or other third-party payors, that are false, fictitious, or fraudulent; from knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false statement or record material to a false or fraudulent claim or obligation to pay or transmit property to the federal government; or from knowingly concealing or knowingly and improperly avoiding or decreasing an obligation to pay money to the federal government. Manufacturers can be held liable under the FCA even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of 47 Table of Contents false or fraudulent claims. The FCA also permits a private individual acting as a “whistleblower” to bring qui tam actions on behalf of the federal government alleging violations of the FCA and to share in any monetary recovery. When an entity is determined to have violated the FCA, the government may impose civil fines and penalties for each false claim, plus treble damages, and exclude the entity from participation in Medicare, Medicaid and other federal healthcare programs; • The federal civil monetary penalties laws, which impose civil fines for, among other things, the offering or transferring of remuneration, which includes, without limitation, any transfer of items or services for free or for less than fair market value (with limited exceptions), to a Medicare or Medicaid beneficiary that the person knows or should know is likely to influence the beneficiary’s selection of a particular provider, practitioner, or supplier of items or services reimbursable by a federal or state healthcare program; • The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, or HIPAA, which created additional federal criminal liability for 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 of the money or property owned by, or under the custody or control of, any healthcare benefit program, regardless of the payor (i.e., public or private) and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by any trick or device a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statements or representations in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services relating to healthcare matters. 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 the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009, or HITECH, and its respective implementing regulations, which imposes, among other things, certain requirements on certain covered healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses as well as their respective business associates and their covered subcontractors relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates, those independent contractors or agents of covered entities that create, receive, maintain, transmit or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also 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; • The federal Physician Payment Sunshine Act, created under the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, collectively, the Affordable Care Act, or ACA, which requires applicable manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to CMS, information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other licensed health care practitioners, and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members; • Federal government price reporting laws, which require us to calculate and report complex pricing metrics in an accurate and timely manner to government programs, where such reported prices may be used in the calculation of reimbursement and/or discounts on approved products; • Federal consumer protection and unfair competition laws, which broadly regulate marketplace activities and activities that potentially harm consumers; and • Analogous state and foreign equivalents of each of the healthcare laws and regulations described above, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers or patients; state and local marketing and/or transparency laws applicable to manufacturers that may be broader in scope than the federal requirements; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry voluntary compliance guidelines and other relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, such as the April 2003 Office of Inspector General Compliance Program Guidance for Pharmaceutical Manufacturers and/or the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America’s Code on Interactions with Healthcare Professionals; state laws that require the reporting of information related to 48 Table of Contents drug pricing; state laws that require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures and pricing information; state and local laws that require the licensure and/or registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state and foreign laws governing the privacy and security of health information that may be more stringent than those in the United States (such as the EU, which adopted GDPR), many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. The distribution of pharmaceutical products is subject to additional requirements and regulations, including extensive record-keeping, licensing, storage and security requirements intended to prevent the unauthorized sale of pharmaceutical products. The full scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform. Federal and state enforcement bodies have continued to increase their scrutiny on interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of significant investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations, including our arrangements with physicians and other healthcare providers and entities, such as our Centers of Excellence or healthcare professionals providing psychological support in our clinical trials, are found to be in violation of any of such laws or any other governmental regulations that apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including, without limitation, administrative, civil and criminal penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, exclusion from participation in federal and state healthcare programs (such as Medicare and Medicaid), imprisonment, and additional oversight and reporting obligations if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar settlement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the curtailment or restructuring of our operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our financial results. If any of the physicians or other healthcare providers or entities with whom we expect to do business, including our Centers of Excellence and healthcare professionals providing psychological support in our clinical trials, are found to be not in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to similar actions, penalties and sanctions. Ensuring that our current and future business arrangements with third parties, and our business generally, comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations, as well as responding to possible investigations by government authorities, can be time- and resource- consuming and can divert a company’s attention from its business. Healthcare Reform In the United States and in some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and likely will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system directed at broadening the availability of healthcare, improving the quality of healthcare, and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. For example, in 2010, the ACA was enacted, which, among other things, increased rebates for drugs sold to Medicaid programs owed by most manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and extends the rebate program to individuals enrolled in Medicaid managed organizations; imposes mandatory discounts for certain Medicare Part D beneficiaries in which manufacturers must agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period as a condition for manufacturers’ outpatient drugs coverage under Medicare Part D; subjects drug manufacturers of certain branded prescription drugs to new annual, nondeductible fees and taxes; expanded healthcare fraud and abuse laws (including the FCA and the Anti-Kickback Statute), government investigative powers and enhances penalties for non-compliance; expands eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; expands the entities eligible for discounts under the 340B Drug Pricing Program; created new requirements to report financial arrangements with physicians, as defined by such law, and teaching hospitals, commonly referred to as the Physician Payments Sunshine Act; created a new requirement to annually report the identity and quantity of drug samples that manufacturers and authorized distributors of record provide to physicians; created a Patient Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and established the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the United States since the ACA was enacted. For example, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, created measures for spending reductions by Congress. This includes aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year. Subsequent legislation extended the 2% payment reduction which remains in effect through 2031. 49 Table of Contents The American Taxpayer Relief Act reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Further, on May 30, 2018, the Right to Try Act was signed into law. The law, among other things, provides a federal framework for certain patients to access certain investigational new drug products that have completed a Phase I clinical trial and that are undergoing investigation for FDA approval. Under certain circumstances, eligible patients can seek treatment without enrolling in clinical trials and without obtaining FDA permission under the FDA expanded access program. There is no obligation for a drug manufacturer to make its drug products available to eligible patients as a result of the Right to Try Act. On March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law. Due to the Statutory Pay-As-You-Go Act of 2010, estimated budget deficit increases resulting from the American Rescue Plan of 2021, and subsequent legislation, Medicare payments to providers were further reduced starting on January 1, 2025; however, legislation has been introduced in the U.S. Congress that would, if enacted, reverse these payment reductions.  In addition to provider payment cuts under Medicare, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 also eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. These laws and regulations may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding available for healthcare providers and may otherwise affect the prices we may obtain for any of our product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval or the frequency with which any such product candidate is prescribed or used. The Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, includes several provisions that may impact our business to varying degrees, including provisions that reduce the out-of-pocket cap for Medicare Part D beneficiaries to $2,000 starting in 2025; imposes new manufacturer financial liability on certain drugs under Medicare Part D, allow the U.S. government to negotiate Medicare Part B and Part D price caps for certain high-cost drugs and biologics without generic or biosimilar competition, require companies to pay rebates to Medicare for certain drug prices that increase faster than inflation, and delay the rebate rule that would limit the fees that pharmacy benefit managers can charge. Further, under the IRA, orphan drugs are exempted from the Medicare drug price negotiation program, but only if they have one orphan designation and for which the only approved indication is for that disease or condition. If a product receives multiple orphan designations or has multiple approved indications, it may not qualify for the orphan drug exemption. The implementation of the IRA is currently subject to ongoing litigation challenging the constitutionality of the IRA’s Medicare drug price negotiation program. The overall impact that the IRA will have on our business and the healthcare industry in general is not yet known. Moreover, payment methodologies may be subject to changes in healthcare legislation and regulatory initiatives. For example, CMS may develop new payment and delivery models, such as bundled payment models. Recently, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny over the manner in which manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. Such scrutiny has resulted in several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, reduce the cost of drugs under Medicare, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for pharmaceutical products. In addition, President Biden issued multiple executive orders that have sought to reduce prescription drug costs. At a federal level, President Trump reversed some of President Biden’s executive orders including rescinding Executive Order 14087 entitled “Lowering Prescription Drug Costs for Americans." President Trump may issue new executive orders designed to impact drug pricing. Although any proposed measures may require authorization through additional legislation to become effective, and the Trump administration may reverse or otherwise change these measures, both the Trump administration and Congress have indicated that they will continue to seek measures to control drug costs. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. We expect that additional foreign, federal and state healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in limited coverage and reimbursement and reduced demand for our products, once approved, or additional pricing pressures. It is also possible that additional governmental action will be taken in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. Human Capital Management 50 Table of Contents As a biotechnology company dedicated to accelerating patient access to evidence-based innovation in mental health, our team is the key to our success, and we believe it is essential to invest in building an engaged, inclusive, supported, and incentivized workforce who can help us achieve our vision of a world of mental wellbeing. As of December 31, 2024, we had 166 employees, which represented a decrease of 11% compared to the prior year, of whom 125 employees are engaged in research and development activities and 41 employees are engaged in general administrative functions. As of December 31, 2023, we had 186 employees, of whom 141 employees are engaged in research and development activities and 45 employees are engaged in general administrative functions. As of December 31, 2024, 42% of our employees are located in the US, while the remaining 58% are located in the UK. We have no collective bargaining agreements with our employees and we have not experienced any work stoppages. We believe our relations with our employees are good. Mental Health and Wellbeing As a biotechnology company focused on mental health, we aspire to be a leader in building a workplace that reduces the stigma of mental illness and fosters employee wellbeing. We take a holistic view of wellbeing support that includes mental and physical health support for all employees at Compass. We offer various wellbeing resources which include: • company-paid employee health care coverage, including access and financial support for a private mental health care in the UK; • a global employee assistance program run by certified counselors, offering up to 10 therapy sessions per issue for team members and full access to online resources for their families; • one-to-one confidential well-being check-ins, onboarding and off boarding with our well-being community lead; • community circles, providing a forum for employees to discuss any topic with colleagues, providing open communication and support; • team meetings periodically include well-being segments facilitated by our well-being community lead and we use well-being team surveys and manager-led discussions during team meetings to identify and overcome any wellbeing issues; • periodic training for managers on how to address well-being issues in their teams and provide support; • access to a meditation app with weekly group meditation sessions; and • company-wide shutdown over the year-end holiday, to make it easier for team members to disconnect during their time off. In 2023 we signed the StigmaFree pledge organized by the National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI), as part of our commitment to a company culture of openness, acceptance, and understanding about employees’ overall mental health and well-being. In 2024, after a thorough and rigorous selection process, we were approved as a Corporate Sponsor of NAMI, enabling an even stronger partnership with them. NAMI is the largest grassroots mental health organization in the United States dedicated to building better lives for the millions of Americans affected by mental illness. Employee Development and Training We believe that the individual growth of our employees will fuel the company’s growth over time since our talent is uniquely experienced in our pioneering work. We are committed to the continued development of our employees, and to support their growth. To help us identify, foster, and retain high performing employees, we have a range of resources and initiatives, including talent reviews to assess and calibrate talent for the purposes of rewards and development, a process for performance and development goals that is tied to employees receiving feedback throughout the year and assessing individual 51 Table of Contents performance and rewards at the end of the year, and job architecture, providing employees with guidance and clear pathways for developing and progressing their career and twice-yearly promotions cycle. Compensation and Benefits Our compensation and benefits are designed to provide employees with total compensation packages that are competitive with those offered by our peers and other companies with which we compete for talent. We evaluate our offerings on an annual basis to ensure competitiveness of our programs and adjust as needed. We provide competitive compensation and comprehensive benefits for our employees. Our compensation packages include base salary, annual bonus, annual equity awards, company paid healthcare plans, generous paid time-off and leave policies, travel insurance, life/disability and income protection insurance, and retirement saving plans with company matching contributions. We also have an employee share purchase plan, under which eligible employees have the opportunity to buy our shares through payroll deductions every six months at a discount. Corporate Information Compass Pathways plc was originally incorporated as a private limited company under the laws of England and Wales in June 2020 under the name Compass Rx Limited to become a holding company for Compass Pathfinder Holdings Limited. Compass Rx Limited was subsequently re-registered as a public limited company in August 2020 and renamed Compass Pathways plc. Compass Pathfinder Holdings Limited was originally incorporated under the laws of England and Wales in June 2017. Our registered office is located at 3rd Floor, 1 Ashley Road, Altrincham, Cheshire, WA14 2DT, United Kingdom, and our telephone number is +1 (646) 905-3974. Our website address is www.compasspathways.com. We do not incorporate the information on or accessible through our website into this Annual Report, and you should not consider any information on, or that can be accessed through, our website as part of this Annual Report. We make available free of charge through our website our Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K and amendments to these reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file or furnish such materials to the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission. 52 Table of Contents