Cardiff Oncology, Inc. 10-K

ITEM 1. BUSINESS We are a clinical-stage biotechnology company leveraging PLK1 inhibition, a well-validated oncology drug target, to develop novel therapies across a range of cancers with the greatest unmet medical need. Our goal is to target tumor vulnerabilities with treatment combinations of onvansertib, our oral and highly selective PLK1 inhibitor, and standard-of-care therapeutics. We are focusing our clinical program in indications such as RAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer ("mCRC"), as well as in investigator-initiated trials in metastatic pancreatic ductal adenocarcinoma ("mPDAC"), small cell lung cancer ("SCLC"), and triple negative breast cancer ("TNBC"). Our clinical development programs incorporate tumor genomics and biomarker assays to refine assessment of patient response to treatment. Our Lead Drug Candidate, Onvansertib Onvansertib is an oral, small molecule drug candidate that is highly specific for PLK1 inhibition with a 24-hour half-life. We believe the attributes of onvansertib described below, as well as early clinical evidence of favorable safety and efficacy, with expected on-target, manageable and transient side effects, may prove beneficial in addressing clinical therapeutic needs across a variety of cancers: • Onvansertib is highly potent and highly selective against the PLK1 enzyme (IC 50 = 2nM; IC 50 is the concentration for 50% inhibition), compared to prior PLK1 inhibitors that were pan-inhibitors of several PLK targets. Low or no activity of onvansertib was observed on a panel of 63 kinases (IC50>500 nM), including the PLK members PLK2 and PLK3 (IC 50 >10,000 nM); • Onvansertib is orally bioavailable, allowing for relative ease and flexibility of dosing; • Onvansertib has a relatively short drug half-life of 24 hours, allowing for flexible dosing and scheduling which has shown favorable safety and tolerability across multiple clinical trials; In vitro studies have shown synergistic effects when onvansertib was administered in combination with different cytotoxic agents including microtubule-targeting agents, topoisomerase 1 inhibitors, antimetabolites, alkylating agents, proteasome inhibitors, kinase inhibitors, PARP inhibitors, BCL-2 inhibitors, and androgen biosynthesis inhibitors. In addition, in vivo combination studies have confirmed the positive results obtained in vitro and additive or synergistic effects on efficacy have been observed in xenograft models of onvansertib in combination with irinotecan, 5-fluorouracil ("5-FU"), abiraterone, PARP inhibitors, venetoclax, paclitaxel, or bevacizumab. Combining onvansertib with standard-of-care cancer agents provides opportunities for synergy with many cancer therapies. There are five ongoing and planned clinical trials of onvansertib: one trial (CRDF-004) in first-line treatment in patients with RAS-mutated mCRC, one trial (CRDF-001) in second-line treatment in patients with mPDAC, and three investigator-initiated trials in first-line mPDAC, relapsed SCLC and unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC. Previously we reported data from two additional trials: one trial (TROV-054) in second-line treatment in patients with KRAS-mutated mCRC, and one trial (CRDF-003), which we refer to as the ONSEMBLE trial, in second-line treatment in patients with RAS-mutated mCRC. RAS-mutated mCRC Program: CRDF-004 Randomized Clinical Trial in First-Line RAS-mutated mCRC CRDF-004 is a Phase 2 open-label, randomized multi-center clinical trial of onvansertib in combination with standard-of-care FOLFIRI and bevacizumab or FOLFOX and bevacizumab for the first-line treatment of patients with RAS-mutated mCRC. The primary objectives of the CRDF-004 trial are to evaluate onvansertib’s safety and efficacy in combination with the standard-of-care, as well as to evaluate two doses of onvansertib, 20mg and 30mg, given in combination with standard-of-care, against standard-of-care alone. The primary endpoint of the trial is objective response rate ("ORR"). Progression-free survival and duration of response will be secondary endpoints. We anticipate interim data in mid-2024. Pfizer Ignite is responsible for 6 Table of Contents the clinical execution of the trial and it is expected to enroll approximately 90 evaluable patients. For more information, please visit NCT06106308 at www.clinicialtrials.gov . Contingent upon the results of CRDF-004, we plan to initiate CRDF-005, a Phase 3, randomized trial with registrational intent. The FDA has agreed that a seamless trial with ORR at an interim point is an acceptable endpoint to pursue accelerated approval, with progression-free survival and trend in overall survival being the endpoints for full approval. Phase 1b/2 Clinical Trial in Second-Line KRAS-mutated mCRC TROV-054, a Phase 1b/2 open-label multi-center clinical trial of onvansertib in combination with standard-of-care FOLFIRI and bevacizumab for the second-line treatment of patients with KRAS-mutated mCRC, completed enrollment in October 2022. The primary objectives of this trial were to evaluate the Dose-Limiting Toxicities ("DLTs"), maximum tolerated dose ("MTD") and recommended Phase 2 dose ("RP2D") of onvansertib in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab (Phase 1b) and to continue to assess the safety and preliminary efficacy of onvansertib in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab patients with KRAS-mutated mCRC (Phase 2). For more information, please visit NCT03829410 at www.clinicialtrials.gov . Data presented on August 7, 2023, provided an update of the ongoing TROV-054 Phase 1b/2 single arm clinical trial in KRAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer: • ORR across all evaluable patients was 29%, with 19 of 66 evaluable patients achieving an objective response. Responses have been observed across multiple KRAS variants; • Median duration of response ("mDoR") across all evaluable patients was 12.0 months (95% confidence interval ("CI"): 8.9 – not reached); • Median progression free survival ("mPFS") across all evaluable patients was 9.3 months (95% CI: 7.8 – 14). Historical control trials of different drug combinations, including the standard-of-care of FOLFIRI with bevacizumab, in similar patient populations have shown ORR and mPFS of 5 – 13% and ~4.5 – 6.7 months, respectively. • A subgroup analysis of patients who were bevacizumab naïve when they entered second-line therapy vs. patients who had received prior bevacizumab in first-line therapy showed that patients who were bevacizumab naïve (n=15) had an ORR of 73% and mPFS of 15 months, which is well above historical controls. In contrast, patients previously treated with bevacizumab (n=51) had an ORR of 16% and mPFS of 7.8 months. • Data on Treatment Emergent Adverse Events ("TEAEs") on the trial showed that onvansertib is well-tolerated when used in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. The more severe, grade 4 TEAEs are either neutropenia or leukopenia, which are common events in patients treated with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. None of the patients with grade 4 TEAEs discontinued treatment due to their condition and all resolved without issue. There were no major or unexpected toxicities seen in the trial. Based on the interim results of the TROV-054 trial, we previously designed the ONSEMBLE trial (CRDF-003) as the next phase of our mCRC program. Upon further review of the clinical data from the bevacizumab naïve subgroup (those patients who did not receive bevacizumab in their first-line therapy), the preclinical data on the mechanism of action and the feedback from the FDA on our clinical development strategy, we made the decision to discontinue enrollment in the ONSEMBLE trial and to initiate the CRDF-004 clinical trial. Phase 2 Clinical Trial in Second-Line RAS-mutated mCRC The ONSEMBLE trial (CRDF-003) is a Phase 2 randomized, open-label multi-center clinical trial of onvansertib in combination with standard-of-care FOLFIRI and bevacizumab for the second-line treatment of patients with RAS-mutated mCRC. The primary objectives of the ONSEMBLE trial are to evaluate onvansertib’s safety and efficacy in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab, as well as to evaluate two doses of onvansertib, 20mg and 30mg, given in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab, against FOLFIRI and bevacizumab alone. The primary endpoint of the trial is ORR. For more information, please visit NCT05593328 at www.clinicialtrials.gov . 7 Table of Contents The ONSEMBLE trial was discontinued in August 2023 as part of the company’s shift to a first-line mCRC program, and the 23 patients enrolled continued treatment per protocol. Data presented on February 29, 2024, provided the first update of the ongoing ONSEMBLE Phase 2 randomized clinical trial in RAS-mutated mCRC: • ORR data for each arm of the trial and for the two experimental arms combined are shown in the table below. The table also presents ORR data for two subgroups of patients: those who were bevacizumab naïve when they entered second-line therapy vs. patients who had received prior bevacizumab in first-line therapy. Objective Response Rate Bevacizumab Naïve Patients (1) Bevacizumab Exposed Patients All Patients FOLFIRI/bev (SoC alone); (N=6) 0% (0 of 3) 0% (0 of 3) 0% (0 of 6) Onvansertib 20 mg + SoC; (N=8) 50% (1 of 2) 0% (0 of 6) 13% (1 of 8) Onvansertib 30 mg + SoC; (N=7) 50% (1 of 2) 0% (0 of 5) 14% (1 of 7) Onvansertib (all doses) + SoC; (N=15) 50% (2 of 4) 0% (0 of 11) 13% (2 of 15) (1) The two partial responses were confirmed on the patients' subsequent scans. • Data on TEAEs on the trial showed that onvansertib is well-tolerated when used in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. No Grade 4 TEAEs were observed for the arms of FOLFIRI and bevacizumab alone and onvansertib 30 mg given in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. Two Grade 4 TEAEs of neutropenia were seen in patients receiving 20 mg onvansertib given in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab. Both patients recovered within 7 and 10 days after withholding the study treatment and no dose reductions in subsequent treatment cycles were needed. There were no major or unexpected toxicities seen in the trial. The ORR data from the randomized ONSEMBLE trial validates the findings observed in the company’s earlier single-arm Phase 1b/2 KRAS-mutated mCRC trial (TROV-054). In the ONSEMBLE trial, objective responses were observed only in bevacizumab naïve patients versus bevacizumab exposed patients. In addition, these objective responses were present only in bevacizumab naïve patients randomized to the experimental arms of onvansertib in combination with FOLFIRI and bevacizumab versus bevacizumab naïve patients randomized to the FOLFIRI and bevacizumab alone control arm. mDPAC Program: Phase 2 Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trial in First-Line mPDAC A two-cohort, non-randomized Phase 2 trial of onvansertib in combination with first-line standard-of-care Gemzar® and Abraxane® will be conducted at the OHSU Knight Cancer Institute. The enrollment criteria includes patients who are treatment-naïve with an ECOG performance status of 0 to 1, and with unresectable, locally advanced, or metastatic pancreatic cancer with measurable disease per RECIST 1.1. The first cohort of patients will receive ten days of monotherapy as a lead-in. After the lead-in period, patients will then move to receive a combination regimen of standard-of-care chemotherapy and onvansertib. The second cohort of patients will not receive the onvansertib monotherapy lead-in, but will move straight to the combination regimen. This combination regimen consists of Gem-Abraxane on days 1, 8 and 15 of a four-week cycle. Patients will receive daily onvansertib with chemotherapy on days 1 through 5, days 8 through 12, and days 15 through 19. Patients will be monitored with bloodwork on a weekly basis. The primary endpoint of this trial will be ORR, disease control rate ("DCR") at 16 weeks. Secondary endpoint will be DoR and PFS. Phase 2 Clinical Trial in mPDAC 8 Table of Contents CRDF-001 is a Phase 2 open-label multi-center clinical trial of onvansertib in combination with nanoliposomal irinotecan (Onivyde ® ), leucovorin, and fluorouracil for 2 nd line treatment of patients with mPDAC, which is being conducted at six clinical trial sites across the U.S. – The Mayo Clinic Cancer Centers (Arizona, Minnesota, and Florida), Kansas University Medical Center, Inova Schar Cancer Institute, and the University of Nebraska Medical Center. Enrollment for this trial closed in October 2023. The objective of this trial is to assess the safety and preliminary efficacy of onvansertib in combination with nanoliposomal irinotecan (Onyvide ® ), 5-FU and leucovorin as a 2 nd line treatment in patients with mPDAC who have failed first-line gemcitabine-based therapy. For more information, please visit NCT04752696 at www.clinicialtrials.gov . Preliminary data presented on September 26, 2023 provided an update of the ongoing CRDF-001 Phase 2 open label clinical trial in mPDAC: • Preliminary data from 21 patients evaluable for radiographic response showed 1 patient achieving a confirmed partial response (“PR”) and 3 patients achieving unconfirmed partial response that were awaiting confirmatory scans; • 19% objective response rate (“ORR”) achieved compared to historical control of 7.7% in second-line setting; • 5.0 months median progression-free survival (“mPFS”) achieved compared to historical control of 3.1 months with standard of care (“SoC”); An update provided on February 29, 2024 indicated 3 of the 4 PRs are confirmed PRs and 1 of the 4 PRs did not confirm on their subsequent scan. mPDAC biomarker discovery trial The investigator-initiated biomarker discovery trial is exploring the impact of onvansertib 10-day monotherapy on tumors in mPDAC patients, and is currently enrolling at the Oregon Health & Science University (OHSU) Knight Cancer Institute. Enrollment for this trial is closed. Preliminary data were presented on September 26, 2023. One patient demonstrated an 86% decrease in Ki67, a well-established biomarker of tumor proliferation, and a 28% decrease in CA 19-9, a clinically-used biomarker to monitor treatment response. Other Clinical Programs: Phase 2 Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trial in SCLC A single-arm, two-stage, Phase 2 trial of onvansertib monotherapy in patients with relapsed SCLC is open for enrollment at the University of Pittsburgh Medical Center ("UPMC"). The trial is designed to enroll 15 patients in Stage 1, with the study proceeding to Stage 2 if 2 or more Stage 1 patients achieve an objective response. Stage 2 is designed to enroll an additional 20 patients. The primary endpoint of the trial is ORR, while key secondary endpoints include PFS and overall survival. For more information, please visit NCT05450965 at www.clinicialtrials.gov . An examination of the safety data from the first six patients by the institutional review board confirmed the trial can continue to enroll as planned. Preliminary efficacy data for seven patients presented on September 26, 2023, showed one confirmed partial response (“PR”), three stable disease (“SD”) and three progressive disease (“PD”). The disease control rate (“DCR”), including PR and SD, is 57% (4 of 7 patients). Phase 1b/2 Investigator-Initiated Clinical Trial in TNBC A single-arm, Phase 1b/2 trial of onvansertib in combination with paclitaxel in patients with unresectable locally advanced or metastatic TNBC is open for enrollment at Dana Farber Cancer Institute ("DFCI"). In Phase 1b, approximately 14-16 patients will be treated with different doses of onvansertib in combination with a fixed dose of paclitaxel to determine the maximum tolerated dose and RP2D of onvansertib. In Phase 2, approximately 34 patients will be treated with the selected onvansertib RP2D in combination with paclitaxel. 9 Table of Contents The primary endpoint of Phase 2 of the trial is ORR, with PFS included as a secondary endpoint. For more information, please visit NCT05383196 at www.clinicialtrials.gov . Identifying Biomarkers that Predict Patient Benefit Our laboratory in San Diego, California, enables us to optimize drug development and patient care. In the clinical development of our lead drug candidate, onvansertib, correlative biomarker analyses are being used to help inform decisions in the evaluation of dose-response and optimal regimen for desired pharmacologic effect and safety. Additionally, some biomarkers can be used as a surrogate endpoint for efficacy and/or toxicity, as well as identifying certain patient populations that are more likely to respond to the drug therapy. In our ongoing CRDF-004 clinical trial in RAS-mutated mCRC, we are quantitatively assessing changes in the RAS mutational burden with a blood test based on ctDNA. In TROV-054, our phase 1b/2 single-arm clinical trial in KRAS-mutated metastatic colorectal cancer, decreases in KRAS Mutant Allelic Frequency ("MAF") in ctDNA after the first cycle of treatment were highly predictive of subsequent radiographic response observed as tumor shrinkage. Operating Segment and Geographic Information We operate in one business segment, using one measurement of profitability to manage our business. We do not assess the performance of geographic regions on measures of revenue or comprehensive income or expense. In addition, all of our principal operations, assets and decision-making functions are located in the U.S. We do not produce reports for, or measure the performance of, geographic regions on any asset-based metrics. Therefore, geographic information is not presented for revenues or long-lived assets. The Market Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Colorectal Cancer ("CRC") is a common cause of cancer death in the US. The American Cancer Society's estimates for the number of CRC diagnoses expected in the US in 2024 are 106,590 new cases of colon cancer and 46,220 new cases of rectal cancer, with an estimated 53,010 deaths predicted during 2024. Cancer‑specific mortality of CRC is predominantly due to metastatic disease. Despite significant progress in the treatment of mCRC, the majority of patients with mCRC succumb to the disease. RAS mutations in the CRC population are common, with greater than 50% of tumors from CRC patients harboring a RAS mutation (43% KRAS, 9% NRAS). The efficacy of first-line therapy in terms of response and survival prolongation remains limited. Therefore, improving the treatment options and effectiveness of treatment is critical to changing the outcomes for the RAS-mutated patient population. Additional Cancer Indications We and certain investigators are currently conducting signal-finding clinical trials to explore the treatment opportunity for onvansertib in mPDAC, SCLC and TNBC. Collaborative Relationship Pfizer, Inc. In November 2021, we entered into a Securities Purchase Agreement (the “SPA”) with Pfizer Inc., as part of the Pfizer Breakthrough Growth Initiative, pursuant to which Pfizer purchased 2.4 million shares of our common stock at a purchase price per share of $6.22 for gross proceeds of approximately $15.0 million. In connection with the stock purchase, we and Pfizer entered into an Information Rights Agreement pursuant to which Adam Schayowitz, Ph.D., MBA, Vice President & Medicine Team Group Lead for Breast Cancer, Colorectal Cancer and Melanoma at Pfizer joined our Scientific Advisory Board, and until May 17, 2024 we agreed to provide Pfizer with rights of first access to any pre-clinical or final clinical data and results generated as part of the onvansertib development program at least two business days prior to us providing such data to a third party. 10 Table of Contents In August 2023, we announced that Pfizer Ignite, a new end-to-end service for biotech companies, will be responsible for the clinical activities of our new CRDF-004 trial in first-line RAS-mutated mCRC. This expands the relationship established in November 2021 and extends the term of the Information Rights Agreement through the conclusion of the CRDF-004 clinical trial. Pfizer Ignite is a new end-to-end service for biotech companies with high potential science that leverages Pfizer Inc.’s significant R&D capabilities, scale and expertise to accelerate the development of breakthrough therapies. We are financially responsible for all clinical trial activities performed by Pfizer Ignite and maintain full economic ownership and control of onvansertib. Intellectual Property We consider the protection of our proprietary technologies and products, as well as our ability to maintain patent protection that covers the composition of matter of our product candidates, their methods of use, and other related technologies and inventions, to be a critical element in the success of our business. As of December 31, 2023, our owned and licensed intellectual property included 53 issued patents and 43 pending patent applications (one U.S. patent application was recently allowed) in the U.S. and abroad, some of which are related to our legacy patent portfolio. The pending patent applications include multiple international patent applications filed under the Patent Cooperation Treaty that may be used as the basis for multiple additional patent applications worldwide. We licensed onvansertib from Nerviano Medical Sciences ("NMS" or "Nerviano") pursuant to a license agreement with NMS dated March 13, 2017 which grants us exclusive, worldwide licenses under a portfolio of three patent families of U.S. and foreign patents covering three broad areas: (1) onvansertib (composition of matter), related compounds and processes for making compounds; pharmaceutical compositions and methods of treating diseases characterized by dysregulated protein kinase activity; (2) salts and pharmaceutical compositions of onvansertib; methods of treating mammals in need of PLK inhibition; and (3) synergistic combinations of onvansertib and one or more of a broad range of antineoplastic agents, and pharmaceutical compositions of those combinations. Patents of this licensed portfolio will expire between 2027 and 2030. U.S. patents of this licensed patent portfolio will expire in 2030, with patent term extension up to 2035. On September 19, 2018, we entered into an Exclusive Patent License Agreement with MIT to a patent family directed to combination therapies including an antiandrogen or androgen antagonist and a polo-like kinase inhibitor (such as onvansertib) for the treatment of cancer. The license agreement as amended covers the rights to develop combination therapies and identified predictive clinical biomarkers across cancer types, expanding potential indications for onvansertib. Under the agreement, we have exclusive rights to develop, make, use, and sell combination therapies that include a PLK inhibitor in combination with an anti-androgen or androgen antagonist, or in combination with a microtubule polymerization inhibitor, for the treatment of cancer. The exclusive license agreement is part of our strategy to explore the efficacy of onvansertib in combination with anti-androgen drugs in cancers including prostate, breast, pancreatic, lung and gastrointestinal. The licensed MIT patent family includes U.S. Patent Nos. 9,566,280, 10,155,006, and 10,772,898, which will expire in 2035, with patent term extension up to 2040. U.S. Patent No. 9,566,280 encompasses using abiraterone in combination with onvansertib to treat cancer. U.S. Patent Nos. 10,155,006 and 10,772,898 broaden earlier issued U.S. Patent No. 9,566,280, by expanding the use of onvansertib to encompass combination therapies with any anti-androgen and androgen antagonist drug, such as Zytiga ® , Xtandi ® and Erleada ® for the treatment of metastatic and non-metastatic castrate-resistant prostate cancer. Our owned intellectual property includes twenty patent families related to onvansertib. These families include patent applications directed to treating cancer using PLK1 inhibitors and determining efficacy of the treatment, treating benign prostatic hyperplasia using onvansertib, treating prostate cancer using PLK1 inhibitors, determining or predicting efficacies or responsiveness of PLK1 inhibitor treatments based on biomarkers, and treating cancers with combination therapies of PLK1 inhibitors (including combination therapies of PLK1 inhibitors with B-cell lymphoma 2 inhibitors, poly ADP ribose polymerase inhibitors, fibroblast growth factor receptor inhibitors, lysine-specific demethylase 1 inhibitors, or irinotecan). Any patents issued in these families will expire between 2039 and 2044. One of the patent families includes a patent application directed to selecting and treating cancers with combination therapies of PLK1 inhibitors. MIT and we co-own this family. On November 17, 2021, we amended the Exclusive Patent License Agreement with MIT to include this patent family. Wherever possible, we seek to protect our inventions by filing U.S. patent applications as well as foreign counterpart applications in select countries. Because patent applications in the U.S. are maintained in secrecy for at least eighteen months after the applications are filed, and since publication of discoveries in the scientific or patent literature often lags behind actual discoveries, we cannot be certain that we were the first to make the inventions covered by each of our issued or pending patent applications, or that we were the first to file for protection of inventions set forth in such patent applications. Our planned or potential products may be covered by third-party patents or other intellectual property rights, in which case continued development and marketing of our products would require a license. Required licenses may not be available to us on 11 Table of Contents commercially acceptable terms, if at all. If we do not obtain these licenses, we could encounter delays in product introductions while we attempt to design around the patents, or we could find that the development, manufacture or sale of products requiring such licenses are not possible. In addition to patent protection, we also rely on know-how, trade secrets and the careful monitoring of proprietary information, all of which can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect some of our proprietary technologies and processes by entering into confidentiality agreements with our employees, consultants, and contractors. These agreements may be breached, we may not have adequate remedies for any breach and our trade secrets may otherwise become known or be independently discovered by competitors. To the extent that intellectual property owned by others is used by our employees, consultants or contractors, disputes may arise as to the rights in related or resulting know-how and inventions. Manufacturing and Distribution We currently rely on third-party manufacturers and distributors to supply and distribute onvansertib used in our clinical studies and nonclinical development programs. Government Regulation We operate in a highly regulated industry that is subject to significant federal, state, local and foreign regulation. Our present and future business has been, and will continue to be, subject to a variety of laws including, the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDC Act”), and the Public Health Service Act, among others. The FDC Act and other federal and state statutes and regulations govern the testing, manufacturing, safety, effectiveness, labeling, storage, record keeping, approval, advertising and promotion of our products. As a result of these laws and regulations, product development and product approval processes are very expensive and time-consuming. FDA Approval Process In the United States, pharmaceutical products, including biologics, are subject to extensive regulation by the FDA. The FDC Act and other federal and state statutes and regulations, govern, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacturing, storage, record keeping, approval, labeling, promotion and marketing, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, sampling, and import and export of pharmaceutical products. Failure to comply with applicable U.S. requirements may subject a company to a variety of administrative or judicial sanctions, such as FDA refusal to approve pending New Drug Applications (“NDAs”) or Biologics License Applications (“BLAs”) warning letters, product recalls, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, civil penalties, and criminal prosecution. Pharmaceutical product development in the United States typically involves preclinical laboratory and animal tests, the submission to the FDA of an Investigational New Drug Application ("IND"), which must become effective before clinical testing may commence, and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the drug or biologic for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. Satisfaction of FDA pre-market approval requirements typically takes many years and the actual time required may vary substantially based upon the type, complexity and novelty of the product or disease. Pre-clinical tests include laboratory evaluation as well as animal trials to assess the characteristics and potential pharmacology and toxicity of the product. The conduct of the pre-clinical tests must comply with federal regulations and requirements including good laboratory practices. The results of pre-clinical testing are submitted to the FDA as part of an IND along with other information, including information about product chemistry, manufacturing and controls, and a proposed clinical trial protocol. Long term pre-clinical tests, such as animal tests of reproductive toxicity and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. A 30-day waiting period after the submission of each IND is required prior to the commencement of clinical testing in humans. If the FDA has not objected to the IND within this 30-day period, the clinical trial proposed in the IND may begin. Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational drug to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of a qualified investigator. Clinical trials must be conducted in compliance with federal regulations and Good Clinical Practices (“GCP”) as well as under protocols detailing the objectives of the trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. Each protocol involving testing on U.S. patients and subsequent protocol amendments must be submitted to the FDA as part of the IND. 12 Table of Contents The FDA may order the temporary or permanent discontinuation of a clinical trial at any time or impose other sanctions if it believes that the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with FDA requirements or presents an unacceptable risk to the clinical trial patients. The clinical trial protocol and informed consent information for patients in clinical trials must also be submitted to an Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) for approval. An IRB may also require the clinical trial at the site to be halted, either temporarily or permanently, for failure to comply with the IRB’s requirements, or may impose other conditions. Clinical trials to support NDAs or BLAs, which are applications for marketing approval, are typically conducted in three sequential Phases, but the Phases may overlap. In Phase 1, the initial introduction of the investigational drug candidate into healthy human subjects or patients, the investigational drug is tested to assess metabolism, pharmacokinetics, pharmacological actions, side effects associated with increasing doses and, if possible, early evidence on effectiveness. Phase 2 usually involves trials in a limited patient population, to determine the effectiveness of the investigational drug for a particular indication or indications, dosage tolerance and optimum dosage, and identify common adverse effects and safety risks. In the case of product candidates for severe or life-threatening diseases such as cancer, the initial human testing is often conducted in patients rather than in healthy volunteers. If an investigational drug demonstrates evidence of effectiveness and an acceptable safety profile in Phase 2 evaluations, Phase 3 clinical trials are undertaken to obtain additional information about clinical efficacy and safety in a larger number of patients, typically at geographically dispersed clinical trial sites, to permit the FDA to evaluate the overall benefit-risk relationship of the investigational drug and to provide adequate information for its labeling. After completion of the required clinical testing, an NDA or, in the case of a biologic, a BLA, is prepared and submitted to the FDA. FDA approval of the marketing application is required before marketing of the product may begin in the United States. The marketing application must include the results of all preclinical, clinical and other testing and a compilation of data relating to the product’s pharmacology, chemistry, manufacture, and controls. The FDA has 60 days from its receipt of an NDA or BLA to determine whether the application will be accepted for filing based on the agency’s threshold determination that it is sufficiently complete to permit substantive review. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review. The FDA has agreed to certain performance goals in the review of marketing applications. Most such applications for non-priority drug products are reviewed within ten months. The review process may be extended by the FDA for three additional months to consider new information submitted during the review or clarification regarding information already provided in the submission. The FDA may also refer applications for novel drug products or drug products that present difficult questions of safety or efficacy to an advisory committee, typically a panel that includes clinicians and other experts, for review, evaluation and a recommendation as to whether the application should be approved. The FDA is not bound by the recommendation of an advisory committee, but it generally follows such recommendations. Before approving a marketing application, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. Additionally, the FDA will inspect the facility or the facilities at which the drug product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve the NDA or, in the case of a biologic, the BLA unless compliance with CGMPs is satisfactory and the marketing application contains data that provide substantial evidence that the product is safe and effective in the indication studied. Manufacturers of biologics also must comply with FDA’s general biological product standards. After the FDA evaluates the NDA or BLA and the manufacturing facilities, it issues an approval letter or a complete response letter. A complete response letter outlines the deficiencies in the submission and may require substantial additional testing or information in order for the FDA to reconsider the application. If and when those deficiencies have been addressed in a resubmission of the marketing application, the FDA will re-initiate their review. If the FDA is satisfied that the deficiencies have been addressed, the agency will issue an approval letter. The FDA has committed to reviewing such resubmissions in two or six months depending on the type of information included. It is not unusual for the FDA to issue a complete response letter because it believes that the drug product is not safe enough or effective enough or because it does not believe that the data submitted are reliable or conclusive. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. As a condition of approval of the marketing application, the FDA may require substantial post-approval testing and surveillance to monitor the drug product’s safety or efficacy and may impose other conditions, including labeling restrictions, which can materially affect the product’s potential market and profitability. Once granted, product approvals may be withdrawn if compliance with regulatory standards is not maintained, or problems are identified following initial marketing. 13 Table of Contents Other Regulatory Requirements Once a NDA or BLA is approved, a product will be subject to certain post-approval requirements. For instance, the FDA closely regulates the post-approval marketing and promotion of therapeutic products, including standards and regulations for direct-to-consumer advertising, off-label promotion, industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities and promotional activities involving the internet. Biologics may be marketed only for the approved indications and in accordance with the provisions of the approved labeling. Changes to some of the conditions established in an approved application, including changes in indications, labeling, or manufacturing processes or facilities, require submission and FDA approval of a new BLA or BLA supplement, before the change can be implemented. A BLA supplement for a new indication typically requires clinical data similar to that in the original application, and the FDA uses the same procedures and actions in reviewing BLA supplements as it does in reviewing BLAs. We cannot be certain that the FDA or any other regulatory agency will grant approval for our product candidate for any other indications or any other product candidate for any indication on a timely basis, if at all. Adverse event reporting and submission of periodic reports is required following FDA approval of a BLA. The FDA also may require post-marketing testing, known as Phase 4 testing, risk evaluation and mitigation strategies, and surveillance to monitor the effects of an approved product or place conditions on an approval that could restrict the distribution or use of the product. In addition, quality control as well as product manufacturing, packaging, and labeling procedures must continue to conform to CGMPs after approval. Manufacturers and certain of their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA during which the agency inspects manufacturing facilities to assess compliance with CGMPs. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money, and effort in the areas of production and quality control to maintain compliance with CGMPs. Regulatory authorities may withdraw product approvals or request product recalls if a company fails to comply with regulatory standards, if it encounters problems following initial marketing, or if previously unrecognized problems are subsequently discovered. 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. Federal and State Fraud and Abuse Laws Healthcare providers, physicians and third-party payors play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of drug and biologic product candidates which obtain marketing approval. In addition to FDA restrictions on marketing of pharmaceutical products, pharmaceutical manufacturers are exposed, directly, or indirectly, through customers, to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations that may affect the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which a pharmaceutical manufacturer can market, sell and distribute drug and biologic products. These laws include, but are not limited to: The federal Anti-Kickback Statute which prohibits, any person or entity from, among other things, knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting, or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in-kind, to induce or reward either the referring of an individual for, or the purchasing, leasing, ordering, or arranging for the purchase, lease, or order of any healthcare item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid, or any other federally financed healthcare program. The term “remuneration” has been broadly interpreted to include anything of value. This statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between pharmaceutical manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other hand. Although there are a number of statutory exemptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting certain common activities from prosecution, the exemptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly, and practices that involve remuneration intended to induce prescribing, purchases, or recommendations may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exemption or safe harbor. The federal false claims and civil monetary penalty laws, including the Federal False Claims Act, which imposes significant penalties and can be enforced by private citizens through civil qui tam actions, prohibits any person or entity from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim for payment to the 14 Table of Contents federal government, or knowingly making, using or causing to be made, a false statement or record material to a false or fraudulent claim to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. In addition, 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 False Claims Act. As a result of a modification made by the Fraud Enforcement and Recovery Act of 2009, a claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. In addition, manufacturers can be held liable under the False Claims Act even when they do not submit claims directly to government payors if they are deemed to “cause” the submission of false or fraudulent claims. Criminal prosecution is also possible for making or presenting a false, fictitious or fraudulent claim to the federal government. Several pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the company’s marketing of the product for unapproved, and thus non-reimbursable, uses. The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996 (“HIPAA”) which, among other things, imposes criminal liability for executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, knowingly and willfully embezzling or stealing from a healthcare benefit program, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and creates federal criminal laws that prohibit knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statements or representations, or making or using any false writing or document knowing the same to contain any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement or entry in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, benefits, items or services. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (“HITECH”) and its implementing regulations, which impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security, transmission and breach reporting of individually identifiable health information upon entities subject to the law, such as health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and healthcare providers and their respective business associates that perform services for them that involve individually identifiable health information. HITECH also created new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in U.S. federal courts to enforce the federal HIPAA laws and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. The federal physician payment transparency requirements, sometimes referred to as the “Physician Payments Sunshine Act,” and its implementing regulations, which require certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to the United States Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) information related to payments or other transfers of value made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors) and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. State and foreign law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws, that may impose similar or more prohibitive restrictions, and may apply to items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers. State and foreign laws that require pharmaceutical companies to implement compliance programs, comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government, or to track and report gifts, compensation and other remuneration provided to physicians and other healthcare providers, and other federal, state and foreign laws that govern the privacy and security of health information or personally identifiable information in certain circumstances, including state health information privacy and data breach notification laws which govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not pre-empted by HIPAA, thus requiring additional compliance efforts. Because of the breadth of these laws and the narrowness of the safe harbors, it is possible that some business activities can be subject to challenge under one or more of such laws. The scope and enforcement of each of these laws is uncertain and subject to rapid change in the current environment of healthcare reform, especially in light of the lack of applicable precedent and regulations. Federal and state enforcement bodies have recently increased their scrutiny of interactions between healthcare companies and healthcare providers, which has led to a number of investigations, prosecutions, convictions and settlements in the healthcare industry. Ensuring that business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations is costly and time consuming. If business operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other applicable governmental regulations a pharmaceutical manufacturer may be subject to penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, individual imprisonment, exclusion from governmental funded 15 Table of Contents healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting obligations and oversight if subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and curtailment or restructuring of operations, any of which could adversely affect a pharmaceutical manufacturer’s ability to operate its business and the results of its operations. Healthcare Reform in the United States Among policy makers and payors in the United States, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. In March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (“ACA”), which substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers in the United States, was signed into law and significantly affected the pharmaceutical industry. The ACA contains a number of provisions, including those governing enrollment in federal healthcare programs, reimbursement adjustments and fraud and abuse changes. Additionally, the ACA increases the minimum level of Medicaid rebates payable by manufacturers of brand name drugs from 15.1% to 23.1%; expanded manufacturer Medicaid rebate liability to include utilization by beneficiaries enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; imposed a non-deductible annual fee on pharmaceutical manufacturers or importers who sell “branded prescription drugs” to specified federal government programs; modified the AMP definition under the MDRP for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted or injected; increased the number of entities eligible for discounts under the 340B program; and included a discount on brand name drugs for Medicare Part D beneficiaries in the coverage gap, or “donut hole.” Since its enactment, there have been judicial, executive and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed the most recent judicial challenge to the ACA without specifically ruling on the constitutionality of the ACA. Prior to the Supreme Court’s decision, an executive order was issued to initiate a special enrollment period from February 15, 2021 through August 15, 2021 for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the ACA marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the ACA. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted, including aggregate reductions of Medicare payments to providers, which went into effect on April 1, 2013 and, due to subsequent legislative amendments to the statute, will remain in effect through 2031, with the exception of a temporary suspension from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2022, unless additional Congressional action is taken. On January 2, 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, reduced Medicare payments to several providers, including hospitals, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. More recently, on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminates the statutory cap on the Medicaid drug rebate, currently set at 100% of a drug’s AMP, beginning January 1, 2024. The cost of prescription pharmaceuticals in the United States has also been the subject of considerable discussion. There have been several Congressional inquiries and proposed bills designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drug products. Most recently, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (“IRA”) was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. For that and other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated. Individual states in the United States have also become increasingly active in implementing regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and other transparency measures, and, in some cases, measures designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine which drugs and suppliers will be included in their healthcare programs. Furthermore, there has been increased interest by third party payors and governmental authorities in reference pricing systems and publication of discounts and list prices. 16 Table of Contents Regulation in the European Union Biologics are also subject to extensive regulation outside of the United States. In the European Union, for example, there is a centralized approval procedure that authorizes marketing of a product in all countries of the European Union, which includes most major countries in Europe. If this procedure is not used, approval in one country of the European Union can be used to obtain approval in another country of the European Union under two simplified application processes, the mutual recognition procedure, or the decentralized procedure, both of which rely on the principle of mutual recognition. After receiving regulatory approval through any of the European registration procedures, pricing and reimbursement approvals are also required in most countries. Data Privacy and Security We are subject to laws and regulations governing data privacy and the protection of health-related and other personal information. In the United States, numerous federal and state laws and regulations, including data breach notification laws, health information privacy and security laws, including HIPAA, and federal and state consumer protection laws and regulations (e.g., Section 5 of the FTC Act), that govern the collection, use, disclosure, and protection of health-related and other personal information could apply to our operations or the operations of our partners. In addition, certain state and non-U.S. laws, such as the California Consumer Privacy Act(“CCPA”), the California Privacy Rights Act(“CPRA”), and the General Data Protection Regulation(“GDPR”), govern the privacy and security of personal information, including health-related information in certain circumstances, some of which are more stringent than HIPAA and many of which differ from each other in significant ways and may not have the same effect, thus complicating compliance efforts. Failure to comply with these laws, where applicable, can result in the imposition of significant civil and/or criminal penalties and private litigation. Privacy and security laws, regulations, and other obligations are constantly evolving, may conflict with each other to complicate compliance efforts, and can result in investigations, proceedings, or actions that lead to significant civil and/or criminal penalties and restrictions on data processing. Other Regulations We are also subject to numerous federal, state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, environmental protection, fire hazard control, and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances and biological materials. We may incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations now or in the future. Some drugs benefit from additional government incentives. Orphan drugs receive special consideration from the FDA in order to encourage pharmaceutical companies to develop treatments for rare diseases. Incentives for the development of orphan drugs include quicker approval time and potential financial assistance, including waiver of the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”). Companies are often permitted to charge substantial prices for orphan drugs, making them more profitable than they would be without government intervention. As a result, the development of orphan drugs continues to grow at a faster rate than the development of traditional pharmaceuticals. Competition Onvansertib is not the first PLK inhibitor that has entered clinical development; however, we believe it currently is the only oral PLK1 inhibitor in active clinical development that delivers highly selective PLK1 inhibition. Onvansertib is also synergistic in combination with numerous chemotherapies and targeted therapeutics and may enhance and/or extend response to treatment across a number of solid tumor cancers. In six clinical trials with over 250 patients, onvansertib was shown to be well-tolerated when dosed as a single agent or in combination with other therapies. 17 Table of Contents The PLK inhibitor that reached the latest stage of clinical development (Phase 3), is volasertib, a pan-PLK inhibitor developed by Boehringer Ingelheim. Boehringer Ingelheim was developing volasertib plus LDAC for the treatment of AML which did not meet the primary endpoint of ORR (EHA 2016). The data showed an unfavorable overall survival trend with the safety profile of volasertib plus LDAC considered as the main reason. Volasertib's safety profile may have resulted from the fact that its inhibition of PLK1 is not highly selective and it also inhibits PLK2 and PLK3. By contrast, onvansertib is able to deliver much more selective inhibition of PLK1 than volasertib. Onvansertib also has a half-life of 24 hours vs. volasertib's 135 hours and it is orally administered. One additional PLK1 inhibitor in early-stage clinical development is plogosertib, which is being developed by Cyclacel. Plogosertib has primary selectivity for PLK1 and secondary selectivity for PLK2 and PLK3. Human Capital The human capital objectives we focus on in managing our business include attracting, developing, and retaining key personnel. Our employees are critical to the success of our organization and we are committed to supporting our employees’ professional development. We believe our management team has the experience necessary to effectively implement our growth strategy and continue to drive shareholder value. We provide competitive compensation and benefits to attract and retain key personnel, while also providing a safe, inclusive and respectful workplace. As of February 22, 2024, we had a total of 32 employees, 31 of whom were full-time. Based on self-identification data, 47% of our employees identify as female and 47% of our employees identify as a racial or ethnic minority. None of our employees are covered by a collective bargaining agreement, and we consider our relations with our employees to be good. Corporation Information We were originally incorporated under the laws of the State of Florida in April 2002. In January 2010, we re-incorporated under the laws of the State of Delaware and changed our name to Trovagene, Inc. In May 2012, our common stock was listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market ("Nasdaq") under the ticker symbol TROV. In May 2020 we changed our name to Cardiff Oncology, Inc. and our Nasdaq ticker symbol changed to CRDF. Our corporate website address is www.cardiffoncology.com. Our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, proxy statements, current reports on Form 8-K and amendments to those reports filed or furnished pursuant to Section 13(a) or 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, are available free of charge at www.cardiffoncology.com as soon as reasonably practicable after electronically filing such reports with the Securities and Exchange Commission. Any information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not incorporated by reference into, nor is it in any way a part of, this Annual Report on Form 10-K. These reports are also available at www.sec.gov.