Nuvation Bio Inc. 10-K

10-K UNITED STATES SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION Washington, D.C. 20549 FORM 10-K (Mark One) ☒ ANNUAL REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 For the fiscal year ended December 31 , 2025 OR ☐ TRANSITION REPORT PURSUANT TO SECTION 13 OR 15(d) OF THE SECURITIES EXCHANGE ACT OF 1934 FOR THE TRANSITION PERIOD FROM TO Commission File Number 001-39351 NUVATION BIO INC. (Exact name of Registrant as specified in its Charter) Delaware 85-0862255 (State or other jurisdiction of incorporation or organization) (I.R.S. Employer Identification No.) 1500 Broadway , Suite 1401 New York , New York 10036 (Address of principal executive offices) (Zip Code) Registrant’s telephone number, including area code: ( 332 ) 208-6102 Securities registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act: Title of each class Trading Symbol(s) Name of each exchange on which registered Class A Common Stock, Par Value $0.0001 Per Share NUVB New York Stock Exchange Securities registered pursuant to section 12(g) of the Act: None Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is a well-known seasoned issuer, as defined in Rule 405 of the Securities Act. YES ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark if the Registrant is not required to file reports pursuant to Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act. YES ☐ No ☒ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant: (1) has filed all reports required to be filed by Section 13 or 15(d) of the Exchange Act during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to file such reports), and (2) has been subject to such filing requirements for the past 90 days. Yes ☒ NO ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant has submitted electronically every Interactive Data File required to be submitted pursuant to Rule 405 of Regulation S-T (§232.405 of this chapter) during the preceding 12 months (or for such shorter period that the Registrant was required to submit such files). Yes ☒ NO ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a large accelerated filer, an accelerated filer, a non-accelerated filer, a smaller reporting company, or an emerging growth company. See the definitions of “large accelerated filer”, “accelerated filer”, “smaller reporting company”, and “emerging growth company” in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act: Large accelerated filer ☐ Accelerated filer ☐ Non-accelerated filer ☒ Smaller reporting company ☒ Emerging growth company ☐ If an emerging growth company, indicate by check mark if the registrant has elected not to use the extended transition period for complying with any new or revised financial accounting standards provided pursuant to Section 13(a) of the Exchange Act. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the registrant has filed a report on and attestation to its management’s assessment of the effectiveness of its internal control over financial reporting under Section 404(b) of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act (15 U.S.C. 7262(b)) by the registered public accounting firm that prepared or issued its audit report. ☐ If securities are registered pursuant to Section 12(b) of the Act, indicate by check mark whether the financial statements of the registrant included in the filing reflect the correction of an error to previously issued financial statements. ☐ Indicate by check mark whether any of those error corrections are restatements that required a recovery analysis of incentive-based compensation received by any of the registrant’s executive officers during the relevant recovery period pursuant to §240.10D-1(b). ☐ Indicate by check mark whether the Registrant is a shell company (as defined in Rule 12b-2 of the Exchange Act). YES ☐ No ☒ The aggregate market value of the voting common stock, par value $0.0001 per share, held by non-affiliates of the registrant computed by reference to the closing sales price for the registrant’s common stock on June 30, 2025, as reported on the New York Stock Exchange was approximately $ 496,965,132 . In determining the market value of the voting stock held by any non-affiliates, shares of common stock of the registrant beneficially owned by directors and officers have been excluded. This determination of affiliate status is not necessarily a conclusive determination for other purposes. As of February 26, 2026, the registrant had 346,597,289 sh ares of Class A common stock and 1,000,000 shares of Class B common stock outstanding. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE: Certain portions of the registrant's definitive proxy statement relating to the Company's Annual Meeting of Stockholders, to be filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission within 120 days of the registrant's fiscal year ended December 31, 2025, are incorporated by reference into Part III of this Annual Report on Form 10-K where indicated. Table of Contents Page PART I Item 1. Business 3 Item 1A. Risk Factors 30 Item 1B. Unresolved Staff Comments 91 Item 1C. Cybersecurity 91 Item 2. Properties 92 Item 3. Legal Proceedings 93 Item 4. Mine Safety Disclosures 93 PART II Item 5. Market for Registrant’s Common Equity, Related Stockholder Matters and Issuer Purchases of Equity Securities 93 Item 6. Selected Financial Data 94 Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations 94 Item 7A. Quantitative and Qualitative Disclosures About Market Risk 104 Item 8. Consolidated Financial Statements and Supplementary Data 104 Item 9. Changes in and Disagreements With Accountants on Accounting and Financial Disclosure 104 Item 9A. Controls and Procedures 104 Item 9B. Other Information 105 Item 9C. Disclosure Regarding Foreign Jurisdictions That Prevent Inspections 106 PART III Item 10. Directors, Executive Officers and Corporate Governance 106 Item 11. Executive Compensation 106 Item 12. Security Ownership of Certain Beneficial Owners and Management and Related Stockholder Matters 106 Item 13. Certain Relationships and Related Transactions, and Director Independence 107 Item 14. Principal Accounting Fees and Services 107 PART IV Item 15. Exhibits, Financial Statement Schedules 107 Item 16. Form 10-K Summary 110 Signatures 110 CAUTIONARY INFORMATION REGARDING FORWARD-LOOKING STATEMENTS This Annual Report on Form 10-K for the year ended December 31, 2025, contains forward-looking statements within the meaning of Section 27A of the Securities Act of 1933, as amended, or the Securities Act, and Section 21E of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, which are subject to the “safe harbor” created by those sections, concerning our business, operations, and financial performance and condition as well as our plans, objectives, and expectations for business operations and financial performance and condition. Any statements contained herein that are not of historical facts may be deemed to be forward-looking statements. You can identify these statements by words such as “anticipate,” “assume,” “believe,” “continue,” “could,” “estimate,” “expect,” “intend,” “may,” “might,” “objective,” “ongoing,” “plan,” “potential,” “predict,” “project,” “should,” “will,” “would,” or the negative of these terms or other similar expressions that are predictions of or indicate future events and future trends. These forward-looking statements are based on current expectations, estimates, forecasts, and projections about our business and the industry in which we operate and management’s beliefs and assumptions and are not guarantees of future performance or development and involve known and unknown risks, uncertainties, and other factors that are in some cases beyond our control. As a result, any or all of our forward-looking statements in this Annual Report on Form 10-K may turn out to be inaccurate. Factors that could materially affect our business operations and financial performance and condition include, but are not limited to, those risks and uncertainties described herein under “Item 1A—Risk Factors.” You are urged to consider these factors carefully in evaluating the forward-looking statements and are cautioned not to place undue reliance on the forward-looking statements. The forward-looking statements are based on information available to us as of the filing date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. Unless required by law, we do not intend to publicly update or revise any forward-looking statements to reflect new information or future events or otherwise. You should, however, review the factors and risks we describe in the reports we will file from time to time with the Securities and Exchange Commission, or the SEC, after the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. SUMMARY RISK FACTORS Below is a summary of material factors that make an investment in our securities speculative or risky. Importantly, this summary does not address all of the risks and uncertainties that we face. Additional discussion of the risks and uncertainties summarized in this risk factor summary, as well as other risks and uncertainties that we face, can be found in the section titled “ Risk Factors ” in Item 1A of this Annual Report on Form 10-K. The below summary is qualified in its entirety by that more complete discussion of such risks and uncertainties. You should consider carefully the risks and uncertainties described in the section titled “Risk Factors ” as part of your evaluation of an investment in our securities: • Our near-term prospects are significantly dependent on the commercialization of IBTROZI ® (talectrectinib). If we are unable to successfully commercialize IBTROZI, our ability to generate meaningful revenue or achieve profitability will be materially and adversely affected. • We have limited experience as a commercial company and our sales, marketing, and distribution of IBTROZI may be unsuccessful or less successful than anticipated. • If the market opportunities for IBTROZI are smaller than we believe, our revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer. • IBTROZI may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success. • The successful commercialization of IBTROZI and our other product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish adequate coverage, reimbursement levels and pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for IBTROZI or our other product candidates, if approved, could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue. • If competitors develop products, product candidates or technologies that are superior to or more cost-effective than IBTROZI, it would significantly impact the development and commercial viability of IBTROZI, which would severely and adversely affect our financial results, business and business prospects, and the future of IBTROZI, and might cause us to cease operations. 1 • We rely on a select network of third-party distributors, specialty pharmacies and other vendors to distribute IBTROZI in the U.S., and any failure by such distributors, specialty pharmacies and vendors could adversely affect our revenues, financial condition, or results of operations. • If we are unable to maintain agreements with third parties to sell and market taletrectinib in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. or our partnered territories, we will be unable to successfully commercialize taletrectinib if and when it is approved in such jurisdictions. • Failure by us to maintain a manufacturing supply chain to appropriately and adequately supply IBTROZI for commercial and future clinical uses would adversely affect our ability to commercialize IBTROZI and/or result in a further delay in or cessation of clinical trials, and our business and business prospects could be severely harmed. • We may be unable to maintain regulatory approval for IBTROZI in the U.S. or other jurisdictions, which would severely and adversely affect our business and business prospects. • If we or others later discover that IBTROZI or any of our future approved product candidates is less effective than previously believed or causes undesirable side effects that were not previously identified, our ability to market such approved drug could be compromised. • Our regulatory approvals for taletrectinib in the U.S. and China for advanced ROS1+ NSCLC are subject to certain post-marketing requirements and/or commitments, and we may be subject to penalties or product withdrawal if we fail to comply with these regulatory requirements and commitments or if we experience unanticipated problems with taletrectinib. • If we do not obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize additional product candidates or we experience significant delays in doing so, we may incur significant losses. • Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors and customers are subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, transparency laws, health information privacy and security laws and other healthcare laws and regulations, including comparable foreign healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties. • We do not have our own manufacturing capabilities and will rely on third parties to produce clinical and commercial supplies of taletrectinib, safusidenib, and our other current and future product candidates. • We will need substantial funding to pursue our business objectives. If we are unable to receive significant revenues from the sales of our products or if we are unable to raise capital if and when needed or on favorable terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or terminate our product development, other operations or commercialization efforts. • Our level of indebtedness and debt service obligations could adversely affect our financial condition and may make it more difficult for us to fund our operations. • We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, either when testing our product candidates in the clinic or at the commercial stage, and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims. • Clinical trials are very expensive, time-consuming and difficult to design and implement, and involve uncertain outcomes. Furthermore, results of earlier preclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of results of future preclinical studies or clinical trials. • We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do. • Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our Drug-Drug Conjugate platform is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value, or if competing technological approaches will limit the commercial value of our product candidates or render our platform obsolete. 2 • We rely on third parties to perform the chemistry work associated with our drug discovery and preclinical activities and to conduct our preclinical studies and future clinical trials, and our business could be substantially harmed if these third parties cease performing services or perform in an unsatisfactory manner. • If we are unable to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce sufficient patent and other intellectual property rights for our product candidates and technology, or if the scope of patent and other intellectual property rights obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market. • Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed. • We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful, and issued patents covering our technology and product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged. • Our business, operations and clinical development plans and timelines and supply chain could be adversely affected by the effects of health epidemics, on the manufacturing, clinical trial and other business activities performed by us or by third parties with whom we conduct business, including our contract manufacturing organizations ("CMOs"), contract research organizations ("CROs"), shippers and others. • Our future success depends on our ability to retain Dr. Hung and our other key employees, consultants and advisors and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel. • The dual-class structure of our Common Stock has the effect of concentrating voting power with our Chief Executive Officer, which limits other stockholders’ ability to influence the outcome of important transactions, including a change in control. PART I Item 1. Business. On February 10, 2021, (the “Closing Date”), Nuvation Bio Inc., a Delaware corporation (“Legacy Nuvation Bio”), Panacea Acquisition Corp. (“Panacea”), and Panacea Merger Subsidiary Corp, a Delaware corporation and a direct, wholly owned subsidiary of Panacea (“Merger Sub”) consummated the transactions contemplated by an Agreement and Plan of Merger among them dated October 20, 2020 (“Merger Agreement”). Pursuant to the terms of the Merger Agreement, a business combination of Panacea and Legacy Nuvation Bio was effected through the merger of Merger Sub with and into Legacy Nuvation Bio, with Legacy Nuvation Bio surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of Panacea (the “Merger”). On the Closing Date, Legacy Nuvation Bio changed its name to Nuvation Bio Operating Company Inc. and Panacea changed its name to Nuvation Bio Inc. (the “Company” or “Nuvation Bio”). In connection with the closing of the Merger, our Class A common stock and warrants to purchase shares of our Class A common stock began trading on The New York Stock Exchange under the symbols “NUVB” and “NUVB.WS,” respectively, on February 11, 2021. The disclosure in Items 1 and 1A of this report gives effect to the Merger and includes the operations of Legacy Nuvation Bio prior to the Merger. On April 9, 2024 (the “Acquisition Date”), the Company completed its acquisition of AnHeart Therapeutics Ltd., an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands (“AnHeart”), pursuant to that certain Agreement and Plan of Merger (the “AnHeart Merger Agreement”), by and among the Company, AnHeart, Artemis Merger Sub I, Ltd., an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands and a wholly owned 3 subsidiary of the Company, and Artemis Merger Sub II, Ltd., an exempted company incorporated under the laws of the Cayman Islands and a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. “Nuvation Bio” is a registered trademark of Nuvation Bio Inc. in the U.S. and other countries. Other trademarks or service marks appearing in this report may be trademarks or service marks of other owners. Business Overview We are a global oncology company focused on tackling some of the toughest challenges in cancer treatment with the goal of developing therapies that create a profound, positive impact on patients’ lives. We were founded in 2018 by our chief executive officer, David Hung, M.D., who founded Medivation, Inc. and led its successful development of oncology drugs Xtandi® and talazoparib (now marketed as Talzenna®), leading to its $14.3 billion sale to Pfizer Inc. (“Pfizer”) in 2016. We leverage our team’s extensive expertise in medicinal chemistry, preclinical development, drug development, business development, manufacturing, and commercialization to pursue oncology targets validated by strong clinical or preclinical data and develop novel small molecules that improve the activity and overcome the liabilities of currently marketed drugs. The foundations of our approach include: • The pursuit of validated targets: We identify and pursue oncology targets validated by strong clinical or preclinical data that provide a high degree of confidence in generating clinically meaningful benefit. We focus on targets where there has been some progress by others in generating clinical candidates or approved drugs, and we then attempt to design or acquire novel or potential best-in-class product candidates to overcome the encountered safety liabilities or limitations in efficacy. • Innovative medicinal chemistry expertise: We use our medicinal chemistry proficiency to generate differentiated product candidates, focused on improving their safety, anti-tumor activity and pharmacologic profiles over other standard of care (“SOC”) therapies. We also use innovative medicinal chemistry approaches to generate novel classes of molecules such as our drug-drug-conjugates (“DDCs”). • Human capital management : We believe our employees are our greatest assets. Attracting, motivating and retaining talent at all levels is vital to our continued success. We are building a culture that fosters a productive, professional and inclusive work environment, where people can thrive, have fun, and be inspired to perform their best work. 4 The following table summarizes our product candidate pipeline: We commercially launched IBTROZI in the U.S. in June 2025, following its approval by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) on June 11, 2025 for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1-positive (“ROS1+”) non-small cell lung cancer (“NSCLC”). Taletrectinib has also been approved by Japan’s Ministry of Health, Labour, and Welfare (“MHLW”) and by China’s National Medical Products Administration (“NMPA”) for the treatment of adult patients with ROS1+ locally advanced or metastatic NSCLC (“mNSCLC”). Taletrectinib is being commercialized in Japan by our partner Nippon Kayaku Co., Ltd (“NK”) under the brand name IBTROZI and in China by our partner Innovent Biologics (Suzhou) Co. Ltd. (“Innovent”) under the brand name DOVBLERON®. Taletrectinib has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the U.S. FDA for the treatment of patients with ROS1+ NSCLC and other NSCLC indications and was previously granted Breakthrough Therapy Designations by both the U.S. FDA and China’s NMPA for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC. In January 2026, we announced a partnership with Eisai Co., Ltd. (“Eisai”) to commercialize taletrectinib in Europe and other territories outside the U.S., China and Japan. In partnership with Eisai, we expect to submit a Marketing Authorization Application (“MAA”) to the European Medicines Agency (“EMA”) in the first half of 2026. Taletrectinib continues to be evaluated for the treatment of patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC in two Phase 2 single-arm pivotal studies: TRUST-I in China, and TRUST-II, a global study, as well as in a confirmatory randomized Phase 3 study versus crizotinib in China known as TRUST-III. In September 2025, we announced our first patient was enrolled in a global Phase 3, placebo-controlled study known as TRUST-IV, to evaluate taletrectinib for the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected ROS1+ early-stage NSCLC. In addition to taletrectinib, our clinical stage pipeline includes safusidenib, a novel, oral, potent, brain penetrant, targeted inhibitor of mutant isocitrate dehydrogenase 1 (“mIDH1”). Safusidenib is being evaluated in the SIGMA study, which is a randomized Phase 3 study for the maintenance treatment of high-risk or high-grade IDH1-mutant astrocytoma with safusidenib against placebo. Strategy We strive to deliver meaningful benefits to patients with serious unmet medical needs in oncology by developing and commercializing novel and differentiated therapies. The core elements of our strategy include: • Maximize the value of IBTROZI, including continued investment and execution of our U.S. commercial launch in ROS1+ mNSCLC, and supporting the ongoing development and commercialization efforts of our collaboration partners Innovent, NK, and Eisai in their respective licensed territories. 5 • Advancing the ongoing clinical development of safusidenib and continued evaluation of preclinical candidates from our drug-drug conjugate (DDC) platform. • Leveraging our deep insights in medicinal chemistry to pursue innovative clinical candidates and our business development expertise to identify and in-license or acquire additional promising drug candidates. • Identifying strategic opportunities to accelerate development timelines and maximize the value of our pipeline. U.S. Commercialization of IBTROZI IBTROZI is an oral, potent, central nervous system-active, selective, next-generation ROS1 inhibitor. On June 11, following Priority Review and Breakthrough Therapy Designations for both TKI-naïve and TKI-pretreated disease, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (“FDA”) approved IBTROZI for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC. We believe IBTROZI is becoming the new standard of care in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC, which is supported by IBTROZI’s best-in-class efficacy and safety profile including objective response rate, durable responses, prolonged progression-free survival, brain penetrance to improve outcomes for patients with brain metastases, activity against tumors that have developed resistance mutations to approved ROS1 tyrosine kinase inhibitors (“TKIs”) such as G2032R, and a low rate of treatment discontinuation. As the potential new standard of care in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC, we believe the market opportunity for IBTROZI is significant. Each year, more than one million people globally are diagnosed with NSCLC, the most common form of lung cancer. It is estimated that approximately 2% of patients with NSCLC have ROS1+ disease (Lin et al 2017; Zhang et al 2019). Up to 35% of patients newly diagnosed with metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC have tumors that spread to their brain, increasing up to 55% for those whose cancer has progressed following initial treatment (Ou et al 2019). To support this significant market opportunity, we have 71 commercial field team members, including key account managers and national account teams, along with 7 medical affairs field team members. We offer a wide range of resources to support access and affordability for eligible IBTROZI patients, including our Nuvation Connect TM patient support program, which provides a range of resources, including field reimbursement support, which are designed to support access and affordability to eligible patients prescribed IBTROZI. Taletrectinib Development Programs IBTROZI Pivotal Studies Overview IBTROZI’s regulatory approval in the U.S. for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC is based on positive data from two pivotal Phase 2 single-arm studies: TRUST-I in China, and TRUST-II, a global study. With nearly 300 patients enrolled in TRUST-I and TRUST-II, these pivotal studies represent one of the largest global clinical trial programs to date in locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC. IBTROZI’s FDA approved label is based on an October 2024 data cutoff for TRUST-I and TRUST-II. In TRUST-I, IBTROZI achieved a confirmed objective response rate (“cORR”) of 90% in TKI-naïve patients. These findings were reinforced by the TRUST-II results, with a cORR of 85% in TKI-naïve patients. At the time of the October 2024 data cutoff, the median duration of response (“DOR”) had not been reached in either study. However, based on a more recent August 2025 data cutoff, we announced that IBTROZI’s median DOR in the pooled TRUST-I and TRUST-II studies had matured to 50 months. We plan on providing additional data from the August 2025 data cutoff at a medical conference in 2026. Across the TRUST-I and TRUST-II pivotal studies, consistent results were also observed among patients who were previously treated with a ROS1 TKI (“TKI-pretreated”). As of the October 2024 data cutoff, in TRUST-I, treatment with IBTROZI achieved a cORR of 52% and median DOR of 13.2 months for TKI-pretreated patients, with median follow-up for responses of 33 months. In TRUST-II, treatment with IBTROZI achieved a cORR of 62%, and as of October 2024, the median DOR was 19.4 months in these patients, with a median follow-up for responses of 19 months. IBTROZI was generally well-tolerated, with most adverse events being low grade, transient and manageable. Patients infrequently (7%) discontinued treatment due to treatment-emergent adverse events (“TEAEs”). The most 6 common adverse reactions (≥20%) included diarrhea (64%), nausea (47%), vomiting (43%), dizziness (22%), rash (22%), constipation (21%), and fatigue (20%). Overall, the majority of central nervous system events were mild to moderate (~90%) and resolved within days, and dose modifications due to these events were low (~5%). Approximately 90% of reported cases of dizziness were Grade 1 (mild) and transient. Liver enzyme elevations (AST 87%/ALT 85%) and QT prolongation (19%) were manageable with standard monitoring and dose modifications. Additional Clinical Studies We are also evaluating taletrectinib in a confirmatory randomized Phase 3 study versus crizotinib in China for treatment naïve patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC, which is known as TRUST-III, as well as in a global Phase 3, placebo-controlled study for the adjuvant treatment of patients with resected ROS1+ early-stage NSCLC, which is known as TRUST-IV. Taletrectinib In-License Agreement In December 2018, AnHeart Therapeutics Inc. (“AHT”), a wholly owned subsidiary of AnHeart, entered into a license agreement with Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited (“Daiichi Sankyo”), pursuant to which Daiichi Sankyo granted to AHT exclusive worldwide rights to develop and commercialize taletrectinib (the “Taletrectinib In-License Agreement”). To date, under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement, we have paid Daiichi Sankyo $23.0 million in connection with an upfront payment and the achievement of development and regulatory milestones. In addition, we are obligated to pay up to $20.0 million upon achievement of commercial sales milestones, and a high single-digit percentage royalty based on worldwide net sales subject to certain adjustments. Our obligation to pay royalties under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement will expire on a country-by-country basis upon the later of the expiration of the last valid claim of a patent licensed under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement covering taletrectinib, and ten years after the first commercial sale of taletrectinib in such country. The Taletrectinib In-License Agreement will continue in effect until we cease all commercial activity related to taletrectinib. We may terminate the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement on a country-by-country basis or in its entirety upon 6 months prior written notice if we have bona fide material concerns regarding the lack of efficacy of taletrectinib, if patent claim(s) covering taletrectinib are invalidated in the relevant jurisdiction, or if taletrectinib is determined to infringe one or more claims of a third-party patent. Daiichi Sankyo may terminate the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement due to our insolvency or bankruptcy, or if we challenge any patents licensed under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement. Either party may terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach by the other party that remains uncured for 90 days (or, if such material breach cannot be cured within 90 days, if the other party does not commence and diligently continue actions to cure such breach during such 90 days). We need Daiichi Sankyo’s prior written consent to grant sublicenses under the rights licensed to us under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement, provided that any denial of approval by Daiichi Sankyo must be made in good faith based on reasonable concerns. Furthermore, under certain circumstances, we need Daiichi Sankyo’s prior consent to assign our rights under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement. Taletrectinib Out-License Agreements In May 2021, Nuvation Bio China Ltd. (formerly known as AnHeart Therapeutics (Hangzhou) Co. Ltd.) (“Nuvation Bio China”), a wholly owned subsidiary of AnHeart, entered into a collaboration and license agreement with Innovent (the “Innovent Agreement”), pursuant to which Nuvation Bio China granted to Innovent exclusive rights to commercialize taletrectinib in mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan (collectively, the “Innovent Territory”), as well as certain development rights within the Innovent Territory. To date, pursuant to the Innovent Agreement, Nuvation Bio China has received $67.0 million in connection with an upfront payment, reimbursement of research and development expenses, and achievement of regulatory milestones. In addition, we may receive up to $17.0 million upon achievement of additional regulatory milestones, up to $105.0 million upon achievement of commercial milestones, and tiered percentage royalties ranging from mid-teen to low-twenties on annual net sales of taletrectinib in the Innovent Territory subject to certain adjustments. Innovent’s obligation to pay royalties under the Innovent Agreement will expire on a country-by-country basis upon the later of the expiration of the last valid claim of a patent licensed under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement covering taletrectinib, and ten years after the first commercial sale of taletrectinib in such country. The Innovent Agreement will continue in effect until Innovent ceases all commercial activity related to taletrectinib in the Innovent Territory or termination of the Taletrectinib In-License 7 Agreement. We may terminate the Innovent Agreement if Innovent challenges any patents licensed to it under the Innovent Agreement. Innovent may terminate the Innovent Agreement upon one-month’s prior written notice if it has bona fide material concerns regarding the lack of safety or efficacy of taletrectinib. Either party may terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach by the other party that remains uncured for 90 days (or, if such material breach cannot be cured within 90 days, if the other party does not commence and diligently continue actions to cure such breach during such 90 days), or due to insolvency or bankruptcy of the other party. In October 2023, AHT entered into a collaboration and license agreement with NK (the “NK Agreement”), pursuant to which AHT granted to NK exclusive rights to commercialize taletrectinib for all human indications in Japan (the “NK Territory”), and exclusive rights to research and develop taletrectinib for any indication other than ROS1+ NSCLC in Japan subject to AnHeart’s prior approval. Pursuant to the NK Agreement, AHT received a $40.0 million upfront payment. In addition, we received $25.0 million upon achievement of a regulatory milestone and may receive up to $35.0 million upon achievement of commercial milestones, and a lower-mid double digit percentage royalty on net sales of taletrectinib in the NK Territory. The NK Agreement will continue in effect until the later of first sale of a first generic for taletrectinib for which a drug reimbursement price has been established in the NK Territory, and our obligation to pay royalties under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement for net sales of taletrectinib in the NK Territory. We may terminate the NK Agreement if NK challenges any patents licensed to it under the NK Agreement. NK may terminate the NK Agreement upon 90 days prior written notice if it has bona fide material concerns regarding the lack of safety or efficacy of taletrectinib, or at any time after first commercial sale of taletrectinib upon 6 month’s prior written notice. Either party may terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach by the other party that remains uncured for 90 days (or, if such material breach cannot be cured within 90 days, if the other party does not commence and diligently continue actions to cure such breach during such 90 days), and AHT may terminate the agreement due to insolvency or bankruptcy of NK. In January 2026, we entered into a license and collaboration agreement (the “Eisai Agreement”) with Eisai, pursuant to which we granted Eisai an exclusive license to develop and commercialize taletrectinib in the following territories: the European Union and all member states thereof, Albania, Andorra, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Georgia, Kosovo, Moldova, Monaco, Montenegro, North Macedonia, San Marino, Serbia, Switzerland, Ukraine, Vatican City, the United Kingdom, Russia, Turkey, Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Israel, Jordan, Iran, Iraq, Libya, Lebanon, Egypt, Sudan, Morocco, Algeria, Tunisia, Australia, New Zealand, Canada, Singapore, Philippines, Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Vietnam and India (collectively, the “Eisai Territory”). Pursuant to the Eisai Agreement, we received a €50 million upfront payment. In addition, we may receive a regulatory milestone of €25 million and up to an aggregate of €120 million upon the achievement of certain sales milestones, and tiered percentage royalties ranging from low- to high-teens on aggregate annual net sales of taletrectinib subject to certain customary reductions. Eisai’s obligation to pay royalties under the Eisai Agreement will expire on a country-by-country basis upon the later of the expiration of the last valid claim of licensed patents covering taletrectinib, the expiration of regulatory exclusivity covering taletrectinib, and ten years after the first commercial sale of taletrectinib in such country. The Eisai Agreement will continue in force until the expiration of the applicable royalty term. We may terminate the Eisai Agreement if Eisai challenges any patents licensed to it under the Eisai Agreement. Eisai may terminate the Eisai Agreement if we materially breach or terminate the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement, if taletrectinib has a demonstrated lack of safety for human use due to significant toxicity that was unknown as of the effective date of the Eisai Agreement, if Eisai does not receive certain regulatory approvals from the European Commission by a certain date (except where such failure is as a result of Eisai’s acts or omissions), or on a country-by-country basis if certain fundamental patents are invalidated in such country in the Territory. Either party may terminate the Eisai Agreement in the event of a material breach by the other party that remains uncured for 90 days (or, if such material breach cannot be cured within 90 days, if the other party does not commence and diligently continue actions to cure such breach during such 90 days or if the material breach remains uncured for 180 days), or due to insolvency or bankruptcy of the other party. Safusidenib: mIDH1 Inhibitor Program Safusidenib is a novel, oral, potent, brain penetrant, targeted inhibitor of mIDH1, which is detected in various tumors, including gliomas. IDH proteins play a critical role in the citric acid cycle, also known as the tricarboxylic acid cycle or Krebs cycle, by catalyzing the conversion of isocitrate to α-ketoglutarate. Mutant IDH catalyzes abnormal conversion of α-ketoglutarate to the oncometabolite 2-hydroxyglutarate (2-HG). Accumulation of 2-HG leads to tumorigenesis by inducing changes in various cellular processes, including epigenetic dysregulation. Most patients with IDH mutant glioma harbor the mIDH1 subtype known as IDH1R132H (Machida et al 2020). The Central Brain 8 Tumor Registry of the United States estimated that the incidence of IDH-mutant glioma in the United States in 2018-2021 to be approximately 2,500 new cases per year, with approximately half of such patients classified as low-grade and the other half as high-grade. Safusidenib has high blood–brain barrier (“BBB”) permeability and inhibits mIDH1, including the subtype IDH1R132H. Continuous administration of safusidenib impaired tumor growth and decreased 2-HG levels in subcutaneous and intracranial xenograft models derived from a patient with mIDH1-positive glioblastoma. Moreover, the expression of glial fibrillary acidic protein was strongly induced by safusidenib, suggesting that inhibition of mIDH1 promotes glial differentiation (Machida et al 2020). Phase 1 Study Results A Phase 1 multicenter, open-label, dose-escalation study evaluating safusidenib as a monotherapy in 47 patients was conducted in Japan and sponsored by Daiichi Sankyo Co., Ltd. Patients were divided into enhancing and non-enhancing groups based on the presence or absence of tumor contrast enhancement judged by each investigator at the time of enrollment. Tumor response was assessed by Response Assessment in Neuro-Oncology (“RANO”) for enhancing tumors and RANO-low grade glioma (“RANO-LGG”) for non-enhancing tumors. Tumors that show enhancement on MRI scans tend to have more vascularization and disruption to the blood-brain barrier and are generally associated with a higher degree of malignancy compared with non-enhancing tumors. As reported in the journal of Neuro-Oncology in February 2023, the objective response rates were 17.1% for enhancing tumors and 33.3% for non-enhancing tumors, including one complete response in a grade 4 astrocytoma and one complete response in the target lesions of a grade 3 oligodendroglioma (with stable disease in non-target lesions). The maximum tolerated dose was not reached. Most adverse events (AEs) were grade 1-2. Twenty (42.6%) patients experienced at least one grade 3 AE. No grade 4 or 5 AEs or serious drug-related AEs were reported. Common AEs (>20%) were skin hyperpigmentation, diarrhea, pruritus, alopecia, arthralgia, nausea, headache, rash, back pain, and dry skin. Seven on-treatment brain tumor samples showed a significantly lower amount of D-2-HG compared with pre-study archived samples. Japan Phase 2 Study Results Safusidenib is being evaluated in a Phase 2 open-label, multicenter, single-arm study in 27 patients with IDH1 -mutant grade 2 gliomas who had no prior anticancer therapy except for resection or biopsy. This study is being conducted in Japan by Daiichi Sankyo. As reported in the journal of Neuro-Oncology in November 2025, the study met its primary endpoint, demonstrating an objective response rate (“ORR”) of 44.4%; median duration of response could not be estimated because no progression events had occurred. As of the data cut-off (March 2023), median progression-free survival (“PFS”) was not yet reached, with a median follow-up time of 28 months, demonstrating the long-term potential of safusidenib to delay disease progression. At 24 months, 87.9% of patients were progression free. While the published results reflect the March 2023 data cutoff, as of September 2025, 12 patients remained on treatment with safusidenib, further supporting the durability of responses. Adverse events were mostly mild to moderate and manageable. Grade 3 or greater treatment-related adverse events occurred in five (18.5%) patients. No grade 5 events were reported. Three (11.1%) patients had treatment-emergent adverse events that led to study treatment discontinuation, two of which were considered related to safusidenib by study investigators and were resolved with dose interruption and/or appropriate medical management. It should be noted that a Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”) noncompliance issue regarding the collection of adverse events was identified during the study. Therefore, all safety data presented in this manuscript was based on a subsequent re-investigation and re-collection of adverse events performed in strict accordance with the study protocol to ensure data integrity. Clinical Development Plan for Safusidenib in mIDH1 Glioma We are currently conducting a Phase 3 global study to evaluate the efficacy and safety of safusidenib versus placebo for the maintenance treatment of patients with high-risk or high-grade IDH1‑mutant astrocytoma following standard‑of‑care, which is known as the SIGMA study. The primary endpoint is PFS as assessed by Blinded 9 Independent Central Review per Response Assessment in Neuro‑Oncology 2.0, which the FDA agreed could support full approval in this setting. Secondary endpoints include overall survival, PFS as assessed by the investigator, ORR, and duration of response. The enrollment target for this pivotal cohort is 300 patients. The trial will also enroll a separate, non‑pivotal, single‑arm cohort to examine the efficacy and safety of safusidenib in patients with chemotherapy and radiotherapy naïve grade 3 IDH1-mutant oligodendroglioma. The primary endpoint for this exploratory cohort is ORR. This cohort will enroll approximately 40 patients. Safusidenib In-License Agreement In September 2020, AHT entered into a license agreement with Daiichi Sankyo, pursuant to which Daiichi Sankyo granted to AHT exclusive worldwide (other than Japan) rights to develop and commercialize safusidenib for all human prophylactic or therapeutic uses (the “Safusidenib In-License Agreement”). Daiichi Sankyo retains the right to develop and commercialize safusidenib in Japan. To date, under the Safusidenib In-License Agreement, AHT has paid Daiichi Sankyo $12.0 million in connection with an upfront payment and the achievement of a development milestone. In addition, we are obligated to pay up to $3.0 million upon achievement of additional development milestones, up to $50.0 million upon achievement of regulatory milestones, up to $45.0 million upon achievement of commercial sales milestones, and a high single-digit percentage royalty based on worldwide net sales subject to certain adjustments. Our obligation to pay royalties under the Safusidenib In-License Agreement will expire on a country-by-country basis upon the later of the expiration of the last valid claim of a patent licensed under the Safusidenib In-License Agreement covering safusidenib, and ten years after the first commercial sale of safusidenib in such country. The Safusidenib In-License Agreement will continue in effect until we cease all development and commercial activity related to safusidenib. We may terminate the Safusidenib In-License Agreement on a country-by-country basis or in its entirety upon 6 months prior written notice if we have bona fide material concerns regarding the lack of efficacy of safusidenib, if all patent claims covering safusidenib are invalidated in the relevant jurisdiction, or if safusidenib is determined to infringe one or more claims of a third-party patent. Daiichi Sankyo may terminate the Safusidenib In-License Agreement if due to our insolvency or bankruptcy, or if we challenge any patents licensed under the Safusidenib In-License Agreement. Either party may terminate the agreement in the event of a material breach by the other party that remains uncured for 90 days (or, if such material breach cannot be cured within 90 days, if the other party does not commence and diligently continue actions to cure such breach during such 90 days). We need Daiichi Sankyo’s prior written consent to grant sublicenses under the rights exclusively licensed to us under the Safusidenib In-License Agreement, which Daiichi Sankyo shall not unreasonably withhold. Furthermore, we need Daiichi Sankyo’s prior consent to assign our rights under the Safusidenib In-License Agreement, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. Overview of Our DDC Platform The foundations of our DDCs are built by employing tissue-targeting small molecules fused to anti-cancer warheads of existing drugs with well- understood mechanisms of action. Our platform leverages our drug discovery and chemistry expertise to find the minimum target binding sites of drug X and drug Y and fuse them together, while maintaining activity. Our DDCs are designed to selectively bind to intracellular as well as surface cell membrane targets that are expressed more highly in specific target tissues and to potently deliver anti-cancer warheads to these target tissues. The figure below depicts our DDC approach. DRUG-DRUG CONJUGATES ARE DESIGNED TO BIND TWO DIFFERENT TARGETS SIMULTANEOUSLY 10 Key potential benefits of our DDCs include: • Tissue-selective targeting improves therapeutic index vs. untargeted warhead; • Oral or IV delivery; • Binds intracellular and cell membrane targets; • Highly cell permeable; and • Simpler and less expensive to manufacture than antibody-drug conjugates. Intellectual Property Our commercial success depends in large part on our ability to obtain and maintain patent protection in the U.S. and other countries for our investigational products, to operate without infringing valid and enforceable patents and proprietary rights of others, and to prevent others from infringing on our proprietary or intellectual property rights. We generally seek to protect our proprietary position by pursuing patents that cover the compositions of matter, formulations, methods of use or methods of synthesis relating to our investigational products, as well as other discoveries, technologies, inventions and improvements that may be commercially important to our business. For our product candidates, we generally seek patent protection in the U.S. and in certain foreign jurisdictions. As of December 31, 2025, taletrectinib is covered by patent families that we either own or have exclusively licensed from Daiichi Sankyo worldwide. These patent families cover the composition of matter of taletrectinib, methods of use thereof, or methods of manufacturing thereof. These patents families include issued patents as well as pending patent applications in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions, and patents that have issued or may issue from these patent families are expected to expire from 2033 to 2042 (not including patent term adjustment or extension that may be available to extend the term of such patents). An application under 35 U.S.C. § 156 has been filed in the United States Patent and Trademark Office (the “USPTO”), requesting extension of the term of a U.S. patent covering the composition of matter of taletrectinib by five years. If the extension is granted by the USPTO, the term of the U.S. patent will be extended from 2033 to 2038. For safusidenib, as of December 31, 2025, we have an exclusive worldwide (other than Japan) license from Daiichi Sankyo to patent families that cover the composition of matter of safusidenib, methods of use thereof, or methods of manufacturing thereof. These patents families include issued patents as well as pending patent applications in the U.S. and certain foreign jurisdictions, and patents that have issued or may issue from these patent families are expected to expire from 2035 to 2041 (not including patent term adjustment or extension that may be available to extend the term of such patents). 11 Because of the extensive time required for development, testing and regulatory review of an investigational product, it is possible that, before a product can be commercialized, any patent protection for such product may expire or remain in force for only a short period following commercialization, thereby reducing the commercial advantage the patent provides. In the U.S., the term of a patent covering an FDA-approved product may, in certain cases, be eligible for a patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Act as compensation for the loss of patent term during the FDA regulatory review process. The period of extension may be up to five years, but cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval. Only one patent among those eligible for an extension may be extended and the amount of available extension to any patent term extension-eligible patent depends on a variety of factors, including the date on which the patent issues and certain dates related to the regulatory review period. Possible extensions may be available in Europe and in certain other jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved product. While we intend to seek patent term extensions in any jurisdictions where they are available to us, there is no guarantee that the applicable authorities, including the FDA or the USPTO, will agree with our assessment of whether such extensions should be granted, and even if granted, the length of such extensions. Our trademarks are protected under the common law and/or by registration in the United States and other countries. We also rely on trade secrets to protect our technology and product candidates, especially where we do not believe patent protection is appropriate or obtainable. We seek to protect our proprietary information, in part, using confidentiality agreements with our partners, collaborators, employees and consultants. Our commercial success may depend in part on not infringing upon the proprietary rights of third parties. It is uncertain whether the issuance of any third-party patent would require us to alter our development or commercial strategies, obtain licenses or cease certain activities. Our failure to obtain a license to proprietary rights that we may require to develop or commercialize our future drug products may have a material adverse impact on us. The intellectual property positions for biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies like us are generally uncertain and can involve complex legal, scientific, and factual issues. For information regarding the risks related to our intellectual property, please see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.” Manufacturing and Supply We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our investigational products for preclinical and clinical testing, as well as for commercial manufacture. We also rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties to package, label, store and distribute our investigational products, as well as for our commercial products if regulatory approval is obtained. We believe that this strategy allows us to maintain a more efficient infrastructure by eliminating the need for us to invest in our own manufacturing facilities, equipment and personnel while also enabling us to focus our expertise and resources on the development of our investigational products. We obtain taletrectinib API and drug product pursuant to long-term supply agreements. We currently rely upon a single source for taletrectinib API and are working to develop a second source. For our other investigational products, we have obtained APIs and drug product from various single-source third-party CMOs. We are in the process of developing our supply chain for each of our investigational products and intend to put in place framework agreements under which CMOs will generally provide us with necessary quantities of API and drug product on a project-by-project basis based on our development needs, and which agreements will provide us with intellectual property rights necessary to conduct the business. We seek to use a different CMO for each investigational product and will consider further diversification of drug product and supply organizations as circumstances warrant. Overall, as we advance our investigational products through development, we will start by seeking multiple sources for raw materials and address other potential points of concern over time. Competition The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies, intense competition and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. While we believe that our technology, development experience and scientific knowledge provide us with competitive advantages, we face potential competition from many different sources, including large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for the research, development, manufacturing and commercialization of 12 cancer therapies. Any investigational products that we successfully develop and commercialize will compete with new therapies that may become available in the future. We compete in the segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that develop small molecules and drug conjugates as treatments for cancer patients. There are many other companies that have commercialized and/or are developing such treatments for cancer including large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, such as AstraZeneca plc, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company (“BMS”), Eli Lilly, Merck, Novartis Pharmaceuticals Corporation (“Novartis”), Pfizer, Regeneron Pharmaceuticals, Inc. in partnership with Sanofi Genzyme (“Sanofi”) and Roche. Taletrectinib competes against approved drugs including Pfizer’s Xalkori®, Roche’s Rozlytrek®, and BMS’s Augtyro®. Other ROS1 inhibitors currently in clinical-stage development include Nuvalent’s zidesamtinib. If approved for the treatment of mIDH1 low grade glioma, we expect that safusidenib would compete against Servier’s Voranigo® (vorasidenib). Another mIDH1 currently in clinical development for mIDH1 glioma is Rigel’s olutasidenib. Many of the companies against which we are competing or against which we may compete in the future have significantly greater financial resources and expertise in research and development, manufacturing, preclinical testing, conducting clinical trials, obtaining regulatory approvals and marketing approved drugs than we do. Mergers and acquisitions in the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and diagnostic industries may result in even more resources being concentrated among a smaller number of our competitors. Smaller or early-stage companies may also prove to be significant competitors, particularly through collaborative arrangements with large and established companies. These competitors also compete with us in recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and management personnel and establishing clinical trial sites and enrolling subjects for our clinical trials, as well as in acquiring technologies complementary to, or necessary for, our programs. We could see a reduction or elimination of our commercial opportunity if our competitors develop and commercialize products that are safer or more effective, have fewer or less severe side effects, are more convenient or are less expensive than any products that we or our collaborators may develop. Our competitors also may obtain FDA or comparable foreign regulatory approval for their products more rapidly than we may obtain approval for ours, which could result in our competitors establishing a strong market position before we or our collaborators are able to enter the market. The key competitive factors affecting the success of all of our investigational products, if approved, are likely to be their degree of efficacy, tolerability profile, convenience and price, the effectiveness of companion diagnostics (if required), the level of biosimilar or generic competition and the availability of reimbursement from government and other third-party payors. Government Regulation Government authorities in the U.S. at the federal, state and local level and in other countries regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, approval, labeling, packaging, storage, record-keeping, promotion, advertising, distribution, post-approval monitoring and reporting, marketing and export and import of drug and biological products. The requirements and processes governing these activities vary from country to country. Generally, before a new drug can be marketed, considerable data demonstrating its quality, safety and efficacy must be obtained, organized into a format specific for each regulatory authority, submitted for review and approved by the regulatory authority. U.S. Drug Development In the U.S., the FDA regulates drugs under the Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (“FDCA”). Drugs also are subject to other federal, state and local statutes and regulations. The process of obtaining regulatory approvals and the subsequent compliance with appropriate federal, state, local and foreign statutes and regulations require the expenditure of substantial time and financial resources. Failure to comply with the applicable U.S. requirements at any time during the product development process, approval process or post-market may subject an applicant to administrative or judicial sanctions. These sanctions could include, among other actions, the FDA’s refusal to approve pending applications, withdrawal of an approval, a clinical hold, untitled or warning letters, product recalls or market withdrawals, product seizures, total or partial suspension of production or distribution, injunctions, fines, refusals of government contracts, restitution, disgorgement and civil or criminal penalties. Any agency or judicial enforcement action could have a material adverse effect on us. 13 Our product candidates are considered small molecule drugs and must be approved by the FDA through the new drug application (“NDA”) process before they may be legally marketed in the U.S. The process generally involves the following: • completion of extensive preclinical studies in accordance with applicable regulations, including studies conducted in accordance with good laboratory practice (“GLP”); • submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective before human clinical trials may begin; • approval by an independent institutional review board (“IRB”) or ethics committee at each clinical trial site before each trial may be initiated; • performance of adequate and well controlled human clinical trials in accordance with applicable IND regulations, current GCP requirements and other clinical trial-related protocols and regulations to establish substantial evidence of the safety and efficacy of the investigational product for each proposed indication; • submission to the FDA of an NDA after completion of all pivotal trials; • determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA to accept the filing for substantive review; • satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities where the drug will be produced to assess compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practices (“cGMP”) requirements to assure that the facilities, methods and controls are adequate to preserve the drug’s identity, strength, quality and purity; • potential FDA audit of the preclinical study and/or clinical trial sites that generated the data in support of the NDA filing to assess compliance with GCP; • 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 U.S.; and • compliance with any post-approval requirements, including the potential requirement to implement a risk evaluation and mitigation strategy (“REMS”) and the potential requirement to conduct post-approval studies. The preclinical and clinical testing and approval process requires substantial time, effort and financial resources, and we cannot be certain that any approvals for any current and future product candidates will be granted on a timely basis, or at all. Preclinical Studies and IND The preclinical developmental stage generally involves laboratory evaluations of drug chemistry, formulation and stability, as well as studies to evaluate toxicity in animals, which support subsequent clinical testing. The sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical studies, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and a proposed clinical protocol, to the FDA as part of the IND. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational product to humans and must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. Preclinical studies include laboratory evaluation of product chemistry and formulation, as well as in vitro and animal studies to assess the potential for adverse events and in some cases to establish a rationale for therapeutic use. The conduct of preclinical studies is subject to federal regulations and requirements, including GLP regulations for safety/toxicology studies. An IND sponsor must submit the results of the preclinical tests, together with manufacturing information, analytical data, any available clinical data or literature and plans for clinical studies, among other things, to the FDA as part of an IND. Some long-term preclinical testing, such as animal tests of reproductive adverse events and carcinogenicity, may continue after the IND is submitted. An IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless before that time the FDA raises concerns or questions related to one or more proposed clinical trials and places the trial on clinical hold. In such a case, the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns before the clinical trial can begin. As a result, submission of an IND may not result in the FDA allowing clinical trials to commence. 14 Clinical Trials The clinical stage of development involves the administration of the investigational product to healthy volunteers or patients under the supervision of qualified investigators, generally physicians not employed by or under the trial sponsor’s control, in accordance with GCP requirements, which include the requirement 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, dosing procedures, subject selection and eligibility criteria and the parameters to be used to monitor subject safety and assess efficacy. 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 in relation to anticipated benefits. The IRB must also approve 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. There also are requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and completed clinical trial results to public registries. A sponsor who wishes to conduct a clinical trial outside of the U.S. 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, the sponsor may submit data from the clinical trial to the FDA in support of an NDA. The FDA will generally accept a well-designed and well conducted foreign clinical trial not conducted under an IND if the clinical trial is conducted in compliance with GCP and the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection, if deemed necessary. An NDA based solely or predominantly on foreign clinical data meeting U.S. criteria for marketing approval may be approved if (1) the foreign data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice, (2) the studies have been performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and (3) the FDA is able to validate the data through an onsite inspection or other appropriate means, if deemed necessary. Clinical trials in the U.S. generally are conducted in three sequential phases, known as Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3, and may overlap. • Phase 1 clinical trials generally involve a small number of healthy volunteers or disease-affected patients who are initially exposed to a single dose and then multiple doses of the product candidate. The primary purpose of these clinical trials is to assess the metabolism, pharmacologic action, tolerability and safety of the drug. • Phase 2 clinical trials involve studies in disease-affected patients to determine the dose and dosing schedule required to produce the desired benefits. At the same time, safety and further pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic information is collected, possible adverse effects and safety risks are identified, and a preliminary evaluation of efficacy is conducted. • Phase 3 clinical trials generally involve a large number of patients at multiple sites and are designed to provide the data necessary to demonstrate the effectiveness of the product for its intended use, its safety in use and to establish the overall benefit/risk relationship of the product and provide an adequate basis for product approval. These trials may include comparisons with placebo and/or other comparator treatments. The duration of treatment is often extended to mimic the actual use of a product during marketing. Post-approval trials, sometimes referred to as Phase 4 clinical trials, are conducted after initial marketing approval. These trials are used to gain additional experience from the treatment of patients in the intended therapeutic indication. In certain instances, the FDA may mandate the performance of Phase 4 clinical trials as a condition of approval of an NDA. Progress reports detailing the results of the clinical trials, among other information, must be submitted at least annually to the FDA. Sponsor is also responsible for submitting written IND safety reports, including reports of serious and unexpected suspected adverse events, findings from other studies suggesting a significant risk to humans exposed to the drug, findings from animal or in vitro testing that suggest a significant risk for human subjects, and any clinically significant increase in the rate of a serious suspected adverse reaction over that listed in the protocol or investigator brochure. Phase 1, Phase 2 and Phase 3 clinical trials may not be completed successfully within any specified period, if at all. The FDA or the sponsor may suspend or terminate a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the research subjects or patients are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk. Similarly, an IRB can 15 suspend or terminate approval of a clinical trial at its institution if the clinical trial is not being conducted in accordance with the IRB’s requirements or if the drug has been associated with unexpected serious harm to patients. Additionally, some clinical trials are overseen by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board or committee. This group provides recommendations for whether a trial may move forward at designated check-points based on access to certain data from the trial. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies usually complete additional animal safety studies and also must develop additional information about the chemistry and physical characteristics of the drug as well as finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process, as performed by the manufacturing facility, must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of our product candidates. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested, and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that our product candidates do not undergo unacceptable deterioration over their labeled shelf life. FDA Regulation of Companion Diagnostics A product candidate may rely upon an in vitro companion diagnostic for use in selecting the patients that will be more likely to respond to that therapy. If an in vitro diagnostic is essential to the safe and effective use of the therapeutic product, then the FDA generally will require approval or clearance of the diagnostic at the same time that the FDA approves the therapeutic product. According to FDA guidance, a companion diagnostic device used to make treatment decisions in clinical trials of a drug generally will be considered an investigational device unless it is employed for an intended use for which the device is already approved or cleared. If used to make critical treatment decisions, such as patient selection, the diagnostic device generally will be considered a significant risk device under the FDA’s Investigational Device Exemption (“IDE”) regulations. Thus, the sponsor of the diagnostic device will be required to comply with the IDE regulations. According to the guidance, if a diagnostic device and a drug are to be studied together to support their respective approvals, both products can be studied in the same investigational trial, if the trial meets both the requirements of the IDE regulations and the IND regulations. The guidance provides that depending on the details of the trial plan and subjects, a sponsor may seek to submit an IND alone, or both an IND and an IDE. Pursuing FDA approval of an in vitro companion diagnostic would require either a pre-market notification, also called 510(k) clearance, or a pre-market approval (“PMA”) for that diagnostic. The review of companion diagnostics involves coordination of review with the FDA’s Center for Devices and Radiological Health. The original PMA process, including the gathering of clinical and nonclinical data and the submission to and review by the FDA, can take several years or longer. The applicant must prepare and provide the FDA with reasonable assurance of the device’s safety and effectiveness, including information about the device and its components regarding, among other things, device design, manufacturing and labeling. PMA applications are subject to an application fee. In addition, PMAs for devices must generally include the results from extensive preclinical and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to establish the safety and effectiveness of the device for each indication for which FDA approval is sought. In particular, for a diagnostic, the applicant must demonstrate that the diagnostic produces reliable results in the context of its intended use. As part of the PMA review, the FDA will typically inspect the manufacturer’s facilities for compliance with the Quality Management System Regulation, which imposes elaborate testing, control, documentation and other quality assurance requirements. NDA Review Process Following completion of the clinical trials, data is analyzed to assess whether the investigational product is safe and effective for the proposed indicated use or uses. The results of preclinical studies and clinical trials are then submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA, along with proposed labeling, chemistry and manufacturing information to ensure product quality and other relevant data. In short, the NDA is a request for approval to market the drug in the U.S. for one or more specified indications and must contain proof of safety and efficacy for a drug. The application must 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 FDA. FDA approval of an NDA must be obtained before a drug may be legally marketed in the U.S. 16 Under the Prescription Drug User Fee Act (“PDUFA”), as amended, each NDA must be accompanied by a user fee. FDA adjusts the PDUFA user fees on an annual basis. PDUFA also imposes an annual program fee for each marketed human drug. 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. Additionally, no user fees are assessed on NDAs for products designated as orphan drugs, unless the product also includes a non-orphan indication. 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. Once the submission is accepted for filing, the FDA begins an in-depth review of the NDA. Under the goals and policies agreed to by the FDA under PDUFA, the FDA has 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 designated for priority review. The FDA does not always meet its PDUFA goal dates for standard and priority NDAs, and the review process is often extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. Before approving an NDA, the FDA will conduct a pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facilities for the new product to determine whether they comply with cGMP requirements. The FDA will not approve the product unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. The FDA also may audit data from clinical trials to ensure compliance with GCP requirements. Additionally, the FDA may refer applications for novel drug products or drug products which 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 and under what conditions, if any. The FDA is not bound by recommendations of an advisory committee, but it considers such recommendations when making decisions on approval. The FDA likely will reanalyze the clinical trial data, which could result in extensive discussions between the FDA and the applicant during the review process. After the FDA evaluates an NDA, it will issue an approval letter or a Complete Response Letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the drug with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response Letter indicates that the review cycle of the application is complete, and the application will not be approved in its present form. A Complete Response Letter usually describes all of the specific deficiencies in the NDA identified by the FDA. The Complete Response Letter may require additional clinical data, additional pivotal Phase 3 clinical trial(s) and/or other significant and time-consuming requirements related to clinical trials, preclinical studies and/or manufacturing. If a Complete Response Letter is issued, the applicant may either resubmit the NDA, addressing all of the deficiencies identified in the letter, or withdraw the application. Even if such data and information are submitted, the FDA may decide that the NDA does not satisfy the criteria for approval. Data obtained from clinical trials are not always conclusive and the FDA may interpret data differently than we interpret the same data. Orphan Drugs Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biological product intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the U.S., or more than 200,000 individuals in the U.S. and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making the product available in the U.S. 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 therapeutic agent 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. If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product 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 from the date of such approval, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan exclusivity by means of greater effectiveness, greater safety or providing a major contribution to patient care or in instances of drug supply issues. However, competitors may receive approval of either a different product for the same indication or the same product for a different indication but that could be used off-label in the orphan indication. Orphan drug exclusivity also could block the approval of one of our product candidates for seven years if a competitor 17 obtains approval before we do for the same product, as defined by the FDA, for the same indication we are seeking approval, or if a product candidate is determined to be contained within the scope of the competitor’s product for the same indication. If one of our product candidates designated as an orphan drug receives marketing approval for an indication broader than that which is designated, it may not be entitled to orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan drug status in the European Union has similar, but not identical, requirements and benefits. Expedited Development and Review Programs The FDA has a fast track program that is intended to expedite or facilitate the process for reviewing new drugs that meet certain criteria. Specifically, new drugs are eligible for fast track designation if they are intended to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address unmet medical needs for the condition. Fast track designation applies to both the product and the specific indication for which it is being studied. The sponsor can request the FDA to designate the product for fast track status any time before receiving NDA approval, but ideally no later than the pre-NDA meeting with the FDA. Any product submitted to the FDA for marketing, including under a fast track program, may be eligible for other types of FDA programs intended to expedite development and review, such as priority review and accelerated approval. Any product is eligible for priority review if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition and, if approved, would provide a significant improvement in safety and effectiveness compared to available therapies. A product may also be eligible for accelerated approval, if it treats a serious or life-threatening condition and generally provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies. In addition, it must demonstrate an effect on a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality (“IMM”), which is reasonably likely to predict an effect on IMM or other clinical benefit. As a condition of approval, the FDA may require that a sponsor of a drug receiving accelerated approval perform adequate and well-controlled post-marketing clinical trials. FDA may further require that any required confirmatory trial(s) are substantially underway at the time of accelerated approval. FDA may withdraw drug approval or require changes to the labeled indication of the drug if confirmatory post-market trials fail to verify clinical benefit or do not demonstrate sufficient clinical benefit to justify the risks associated with the drug. If the FDA concludes that a drug shown to be effective can be safely used only if distribution or use is restricted, it may require such post-marketing restrictions as it deems necessary to assure safe use of the product. Additionally, a drug may be eligible for designation as a breakthrough therapy if the product is intended, alone or in combination with one or more other drugs or biologics, to treat a serious or life-threatening condition and preliminary clinical evidence indicates that the product may demonstrate substantial improvement over currently approved therapies on one or more clinically significant endpoints. The benefits of breakthrough therapy designation include the same benefits as fast track designation, plus intensive guidance from the FDA to ensure an efficient drug development program. Fast track designation, priority review, accelerated approval and breakthrough therapy designation do not change the standards for approval, but may expedite the development or approval process. 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 decide that the time period for FDA review or approval will not be shortened. Post-approval Requirements Following approval of a new product, the manufacturer and the approved product are subject to continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, monitoring and record-keeping requirements, requirements to report adverse events and comply with promotion and advertising requirements, which include restrictions on promoting drugs for unapproved uses or patient populations, known as “off-label promotion,” and limitations on industry-sponsored scientific and educational activities. Although physicians may prescribe legally available drugs for off-label uses, manufacturers may not market or promote such uses. Prescription drug promotional materials must be submitted to the FDA in conjunction with their first use. 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 also place other conditions on approvals including the requirement for REMS, to assure the safe use of the product. A REMS could include medication guides, physician communication plans or elements to assure safe use, such as restricted distribution methods, patient registries and other risk minimization tools. Any of these limitations on approval or marketing could restrict the commercial promotion, distribution, prescription or dispensing 18 of products. Product approvals may be withdrawn for non-compliance with regulatory standards or if problems occur following initial marketing. The FDA may withdraw approval if compliance with regulatory requirements and standards is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the market. Later discovery of previously unknown problems with 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; imposition of post-market studies or clinical studies to assess new safety risks or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things: • restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of the product, complete withdrawal of the product from the market, or product recalls; • fines, warning letters, or holds on post-approval clinical studies; • refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications; • suspension or revocation of product approvals; • product seizure or detention; • refusal to permit the import or export of products; and • injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. The FDA strictly regulates marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of products that are placed on the market. Drugs may be promoted only for the approved indications and such promotion must be consistent with FDA-approved labelling. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses, and a company that is found to have improperly promoted off-label uses may be subject to significant liability. Other U.S. Regulatory Matters Pharmaceutical manufacturers are subject to various healthcare laws, regulations, and enforcement by the federal government and by authorities in the states and foreign jurisdictions in which they conduct their business. Our conduct, including those of our employees, as well as our business operations and relationships with third parties, including current and future arrangements with healthcare providers, third-party payors, customers, and others may expose us to broadly applicable fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations, which may constrain the business or financial arrangements and relationships through which we research, as well as, sell, market, and distribute any products for which we obtain marketing approval. The applicable federal, state and foreign healthcare laws and regulations that may affect our ability to operate include, but are not limited to: • The federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which makes it illegal for any person or entity, including a prescription drug manufacturer (or a party acting on its behalf), to knowingly and willfully solicit, receive, offer or pay any remuneration that is intended to induce or reward referrals, including the purchase, recommendation, order or prescription of a particular drug, for which payment may be made under a federal healthcare program, such as Medicare or Medicaid. Moreover, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”) provides that 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 civil False Claims Act. • The federal false claims laws, including the civil False Claims Act that can be enforced by private citizens through civil whistleblower or qui tam actions, and civil monetary penalties law prohibit individuals or entities from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the federal government, claims for payment that are false or fraudulent or making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. 19 • The federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (“HIPAA”) prohibits, among other things, executing or attempting to execute a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters. • HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act of 2009 (“HITECH”), and their implementing regulations also impose obligations on covered entities such as health insurance plans, healthcare clearinghouses, and certain healthcare providers and their respective business associates and covered subcontractors, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. • The federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act requires applicable manufacturers of covered drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program, with specific exceptions, to annually report to the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) information regarding certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals as well as information regarding ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. • Analogous state and foreign laws and regulations, such as state anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to sales or marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by non-governmental third-party payors, including private insurers, state laws that require biotechnology companies to comply with the biotechnology industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the federal government; state and local 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 require the registration of their sales representatives, state laws that require biotechnology companies to report information on the pricing of certain drug products, and state and foreign laws that govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. Pricing and rebate programs must also comply with the Medicaid rebate requirements of the U.S. Omnibus Budget Reconciliation Act of 1990, as amended. If products are made available to authorized users of the Federal Supply Schedule of the General Services Administration, additional laws and requirements apply. Manufacturing, sales, promotion and other activities also are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws. In addition, 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. Products must meet applicable child-resistant packaging requirements under the U.S. Poison Prevention Packaging Act as well as other applicable consumer safety requirements. The failure to comply with any of these laws or regulatory requirements subjects firms to possible legal or regulatory action. Depending on the circumstances, failure to comply can result in significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, integrity oversight and reporting obligations, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits and future earnings, injunctions, requests for recall, seizure of products, total or partial suspension of production, denial or withdrawal of product approvals or refusal to allow a firm to enter into supply contracts, including government contracts. U.S. Patent-Term Restoration and Marketing Exclusivity Depending upon the timing, duration and specifics of FDA approval of any future product candidates, some of our U.S. patents, or U.S. patent applications, if issued, may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Hatch-Waxman Act. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits restoration of the patent term of up to five years as compensation for patent term lost during product development and FDA regulatory review process. Patent-term restoration, however, cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the product’s approval date. The patent-term restoration period is generally one-half the time between the effective date of an IND or the issue date of the patent, whichever is later, and the submission date of an NDA plus the time between the submission date of an NDA or the issue date of the patent, whichever is later, and the approval of that application, 20 except that the review period is reduced by any time during which the applicant failed to exercise due diligence. Only one patent applicable to an approved drug is eligible for the extension and the application for the extension must be submitted prior to the expiration of the patent. The USPTO, in consultation with the FDA, reviews and approves the application for any patent term extension or restoration. In the future, we may apply for restoration of patent term for our currently owned or licensed patents to add patent life beyond its current expiration date, depending on the expected length of the clinical trials and other factors involved in the filing of the relevant NDA. Market exclusivity provisions under the FDCA also can delay the submission or the approval of certain applications. The FDCA provides a five-year period of non-patent marketing exclusivity within the U.S. to the first applicant to gain approval of an NDA for a new chemical entity. A drug is a new chemical entity if the FDA has not previously approved any other new drug containing the same active moiety, which is the molecule or ion responsible for the action of the drug substance. During the exclusivity period, the FDA may not accept for review an abbreviated new drug application (“ANDA”), or a 505(b)(2) NDA submitted by another company for a generic version of such drug where the applicant does not own or have a legal right of reference to all the data required for approval. However, an application may be submitted after four years if it contains a certification of patent invalidity or non-infringement. The FDCA also provides three years of marketing exclusivity for an NDA, 505(b)(2) NDA or supplement to an existing NDA if new clinical investigations, other than bioavailability studies, that were conducted or sponsored by the applicant are deemed by the FDA to be essential to the approval of the application, for example, new indications, dosages or strengths of an existing drug. This three-year exclusivity covers only the conditions of use associated with the new clinical investigations and does not prohibit the FDA from approving ANDAs for drugs containing the original active agent. Five-year and three-year exclusivity will not delay the submission or approval of a full NDA. However, an applicant submitting a full NDA would be required to conduct or obtain a right of reference to all of the preclinical studies and adequate and well-controlled clinical trials necessary to demonstrate safety and effectiveness or generate such data themselves. European Union Drug Development In the European Union, medicinal products are subject to extensive regulatory requirements. As in the United States, medicinal products can be marketed only if a marketing authorization from the competent regulatory authorities has been obtained. The various phases of preclinical and clinical research in the European Union are subject to significant regulatory controls. In the EU, clinical trials are governed by the Clinical Trials Regulation (EU) No 536/2014, or CTR, which entered into application on January 31, 2022 repealing and replacing the former Clinical Trials Directive 2001/20, or CTD, and related national implementing legislation of EU Member States. The CTR is intended to harmonize and streamline clinical trial authorizations, simplify adverse-event reporting procedures, improve the supervision of clinical trials and increasing their transparency. Specifically, the Regulation, which is directly applicable in all EU Member States, introduces a streamlined application procedure through a single-entry point, the “EU portal”, the Clinical Trials Information System; a single set of documents to be prepared and submitted for the application; as well as simplified reporting procedures for clinical trial sponsors. A harmonized procedure for the assessment of applications for clinical trials has been introduced and is divided into two parts. Part I assessment is led by the competent authorities of a reference Member State selected by the trial sponsor and relates to clinical trial aspects that are considered to be scientifically harmonized across EU Member States. This assessment is then submitted to the competent authorities of all concerned Member States in which the trial is to be conducted for their review. Part II is assessed separately by the competent authorities and Ethics Committees in each concerned EU Member State. Individual EU Member States retain the power to authorize the conduct of clinical trials on their territory. The CTR foresaw a three-year transition period that ended on January 31, 2025. Since this date, all new or ongoing trials are subject to the provisions of the CTR. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us and our third-party service providers, such as CROs, may impact our developments plans. European Union Drug Review and Approval In the European Economic Area (“EEA”), which comprises the 27 Member States of the European Union and three European Free Trade Association States (Norway, Iceland and Liechtenstein), medicinal products can only be commercialized after obtaining a Marketing Authorization (“MA”). To obtain an MA for a product in the EEA, an applicant must submit a MAA either under a centralized procedure administered by the EMA or one of the procedures administered by competent authorities in the EEA countries 21 (decentralized procedure, national procedure or mutual recognition procedure). An MA may be granted only to an applicant established in the EEA. The centralized procedure provides for the grant of a single MA by the European Commission that is valid for all EEA countries. Pursuant to Regulation (EC) No 726/2004, the centralized procedure is compulsory for specific products, including for (i) medicinal products derived from biotechnological processes, (ii) products designated as orphan medicinal products, (iii) advanced therapy medicinal products, and (iv) products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of HIV/AIDS, cancer, neurodegenerative diseases, diabetes, auto-immune and other immune dysfunctions and viral diseases. For products with a new active substance indicated for the treatment of other diseases and products that are highly innovative or for which a centralized process is in the interest of patients, authorization through the centralized procedure is optional on related approval. Under the centralized procedure, the EMA’s Committee for Medicinal Products for Human Use, or CHMP, conducts the initial assessment of a product. The CHMP is also responsible for several post-authorization and maintenance activities, such as the assessment of modifications or extensions to an existing MA. Under the centralized procedure in the EEA, the maximum timeframe for the evaluation of an MAA is 210 days, excluding clock stops when additional information or written or oral explanation is to be provided by the applicant in response to questions of the CHMP. Accelerated assessment may be granted by the CHMP in exceptional cases, when a medicinal product targeting an unmet medical need is expected to be of major interest from the point of view of public health and, in particular, from the viewpoint of therapeutic innovation. If the CHMP accepts a request for accelerated assessment, the time limit of 210 days will be reduced to 150 days (excluding clock stops). The CHMP can, however, revert to the standard time limit for the centralized procedure if it considers that it is no longer appropriate to conduct an accelerated assessment. Unlike the centralized authorization procedure, the decentralized MA procedure requires a separate application to, and leads to separate approval by, the competent authorities of each EEA country in which the product is to be marketed. This application is identical to the application that would be submitted to the EMA for authorization through the centralized procedure. The reference Member State prepares a draft assessment and drafts of the related materials within 120 days after receipt of a valid application. The resulting assessment report is submitted to the concerned EEA countries who, within 90 days of receipt, must decide whether to approve the assessment report and related materials. If a concerned EU Member State cannot approve the assessment report and related materials due to concerns relating to a potential serious risk to public health, disputed elements may be referred to the Heads of Medicines Agencies’ Coordination Group for Mutual Recognition and Decentralised Procedures – Human, or CMDh, for review. The subsequent decision of the European Commission is binding on all EEA countries. The mutual recognition procedure allows companies that have a medicinal product already authorized in one EEA country to apply for this authorization to be recognized by the competent authorities in other EEA countries. Like the decentralized procedure, the mutual recognition procedure is based on the acceptance by the competent authorities of the EEA countries of the MA of a medicinal product by the competent authorities of other EEA countries. The holder of a national MA may submit an application to the competent authority of an EEA country requesting that this authority recognize the MA delivered by the competent authority of another EEA country. An MA has, in principle, an initial validity of five years. The MA 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 EEA country in which the original MA was granted. To support the application, the MA holder must provide the EMA or the competent authority with a consolidated version of the eCTD (Common Technical Document) providing up-to-date data concerning the quality, safety and efficacy of the product, including all variations introduced since the MA was granted, at least nine months before the MA ceases to be valid. The European Commission or the competent authorities of the EEA countries may decide on justified grounds relating to pharmacovigilance, to proceed with one further five- year renewal period for the MA. Once subsequently definitively renewed, the MA shall be valid for an unlimited period. Any authorization which is not followed by the actual placing of the medicinal product on the EU market (for a centralized MA) or on the market of the authorizing EEA country within three years after authorization ceases to be valid (the so-called sunset clause). Innovative products that target an unmet medical need and are expected to be of major public health interest may be eligible for a number of expedited development and review programs, such as the Priority Medicines, or PRIME, scheme, which provides incentives similar to the breakthrough therapy designation in the U.S. PRIME is a voluntary scheme aimed at enhancing the EMA’s support for the development of medicinal products that target unmet 22 medical needs. 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 medicinal product will bring a major therapeutic advantage) and they must demonstrate the potential to address the unmet medical need by introducing new methods of therapy or improving existing ones. Benefits accrue to sponsors of product candidates with PRIME designation, including but not limited to, early and proactive regulatory dialogue with the EMA, frequent discussions on clinical trial designs and other development program elements, and potentially accelerated MAA assessment once a dossier has been submitted. Accelerated and Alternative Marketing Authorization Mechanisms Importantly, a dedicated contact and rapporteur from the EMA’s Committee for Human Medicinal Products, or CHMP, or Committee for Advanced Therapies, are appointed early in the PRIME scheme facilitating increased understanding of the product at EMA’s Committee level. A kick-off meeting initiates these relationships and includes a team of multidisciplinary experts at the EMA to provide guidance on the overall development and regulatory strategies. Where, during the course of development, a medicine no longer meets the eligibility criteria, support under the PRIME scheme may be withdrawn. A “conditional” MA may be granted in cases where all the required safety and efficacy data are not yet available. The European Commission may grant a conditional MA for a medicinal product if it is demonstrated that all of the following criteria are met: (i) the benefit-risk balance of the medicinal product is positive; (ii) it is likely that the applicant will be able to provide comprehensive data post-authorization; (iii) the medicinal product fulfils an unmet medical need; and (iv) the benefit of the immediate availability to patients of the medicinal product is greater than the risk inherent in the fact that additional data are still required. The conditional MA is subject to conditions to be fulfilled for generating the missing data or ensuring increased safety measures. It is valid for one year and must be renewed annually until all related conditions have been fulfilled. Once any pending studies are provided, the conditional MA can be converted into a traditional MA. However, if the conditions are not fulfilled within the timeframe set by the EMA and approved by the European Commission, the MA will cease to be renewed. An MA may also be granted “under exceptional circumstances” where the applicant can show that it is unable to provide comprehensive data on efficacy and safety under normal conditions of use even after the product has been authorized and subject to specific procedures being introduced. These circumstances may arise in particular when the intended indications are very rare and, in the state of scientific knowledge at that time, it is not possible to provide comprehensive information, or when generating data may be contrary to generally accepted ethical principles. Like a conditional MA, an MA granted in exceptional circumstances is reserved to medicinal products intended to be authorized for treatment of rare diseases or unmet medical needs for which the applicant does not hold a complete data set that is required for the grant of a standard MA. However, unlike the conditional MA, an applicant for authorization in exceptional circumstances is not subsequently required to provide the missing data. Although the MA “under exceptional circumstances” is granted definitively, the risk-benefit balance of the medicinal product is reviewed annually, and the MA will be withdrawn if the risk-benefit ratio is no longer favorable. Pediatric Development In the EU, Regulation (EC) No 1901/2006 provides that all MAAs for new medicinal products have to include the results of trials conducted in the pediatric population, in compliance with a pediatric investigation plan (PIP), agreed with the EMA’s Pediatric Committee (PDCO). The PIP sets out the timing and measures proposed to generate data to support a pediatric indication of the medicinal product for which MA is being sought. The PDCO can grant a deferral of the obligation to implement some or all of the measures provided in the PIP until there are sufficient data to demonstrate the efficacy and safety of the product in adults. Further, the obligation to provide pediatric clinical trial data can be waived by the PDCO when these data are 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. Once the MA is obtained in all EU Member States and study results are included in the product information, even when negative, the product is eligible for a six-month extension to the Supplementary Protection Certificate, or SPC, if any is in effect at the time of authorization or, in the case of orphan medicinal products, a two-year extension of orphan market exclusivity. Data and Market Exclusivity 23 The EU provides opportunities for data and market exclusivity related to MAs. Upon receiving an MA, innovative medicinal products are generally entitled to receive eight years of data exclusivity and 10 years of market exclusivity. Data exclusivity, if granted, prevents regulatory authorities in the EU from referencing the innovator’s data to assess a generic application or biosimilar application for eight years from the date of authorization of the innovative product, after which a generic or biosimilar MAA can be submitted, and the innovator’s data may be referenced. The market exclusivity period prevents a successful generic or biosimilar applicant from commercializing its product in the EU until 10 years have elapsed from the initial MA of the reference product in the EU. The overall ten-year period may, occasionally, be extended for a further year to a maximum of 11 years if, during the first eight years of those ten years, the MA holder obtains an authorization for one or more new therapeutic indications which, during the scientific evaluation prior to their authorization, are held to bring a significant clinical benefit in comparison with existing therapies. However, there is no guarantee that a product will be considered by the EU’s regulatory authorities to be a new chemical/biological entity, and products may not qualify for data exclusivity. In the EU, there is a special regime for biosimilars, or biological medicinal products that are similar to a reference medicinal product but that do not meet the definition of a generic medicinal product. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided in support of an application for MA. Guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product. Orphan Designation In the EU, Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000, as implemented by Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 provides that a medicinal product can be designated as an orphan medicinal product by the European Commission if its sponsor can establish that: (i) the product is intended for the diagnosis, prevention or treatment of life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions; (ii) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product; and (iii) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition. Regulation (EC) No 847/2000 sets out further provisions for implementation of the criteria for designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product. An application for the designation of a medicinal product as an orphan medicinal product must be submitted at any stage of development of the medicinal product but before filing of an MAA. An MA for an orphan medicinal product may only include indications designated as orphan. For non-orphan indications treated with the same active pharmaceutical ingredient, a separate marketing authorization has to be sought. Orphan medicinal product designation entitles an applicant to incentives such fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization, orphan medicinal products are entitled to a ten-year period of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, which means that the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity is extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed PIP. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications. Orphan medicinal product designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review and approval process. The period of market exclusivity 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 on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product designation, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, an MA may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. A company may voluntarily remove a product from the register of orphan products. 24 Post-Authorization Requirements Where an MA is granted in relation to a medicinal product in the EU, the holder of the MA is required to comply with a range of regulatory requirements applicable to the manufacturing, marketing, promotion and sale of medicinal products. Similar to the United States, both MA holders and manufacturers of medicinal products are subject to comprehensive regulatory oversight by the EMA, the European Commission and/or the competent regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. The holder of an MA 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 (PSURs). All new MAAs must include a risk management plan (RMP), describing the risk management system that the company will put in place and documenting measures to prevent or minimize the risks associated with the product. The regulatory authorities may also impose specific obligations as a condition of the MA. 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. Other EU Compliance Requirements In the EU, the advertising and promotion of medicinal products are subject to both EU and EU Member States’ laws governing promotion of medicinal products, interactions with physicians and other healthcare professionals, misleading and comparative advertising and unfair commercial practices. General requirements for advertising and promotion of medicinal products, such as direct-to-consumer advertising of prescription medicinal products are established in EU law. However, the details are governed by regulations in individual EU Member States and can differ from one country to another. For example, applicable laws require that promotional materials and advertising in relation to medicinal products comply with the product’s Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC), which may require approval by the competent national authorities in connection with an MA. The SmPC is the document that provides information to physicians and other healthcare professionals concerning the safe and effective use of the product. Promotional activity that does not comply with the SmPC is considered off-label and is prohibited in the EU. Much like the Anti-Kickback Statute prohibition in the United States, described above, the provision of benefits or advantages to physicians and other health care professionals to induce or encourage the prescription, recommendation, endorsement, purchase, supply, order or use of medicinal products is also prohibited in the EU. Interactions between pharmaceutical companies and health care professionals are governed by strict laws, such as national anti-bribery laws of European countries, national sunshine rules, regulations, industry self-regulation codes of conduct and physicians’ codes of professional conduct. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment. Infringement of related laws could result in substantial fines and imprisonment. Payments made to physicians and other health care professionals in certain EU Member States must be publicly disclosed. Moreover, agreements with health care professionals may require prior notification or approval by the health care professional’s employer, his or her competent professional organization and/or the regulatory authorities of the individual EU Member States. Failure to comply with these requirements could result in reputational risk, public reprimands, administrative penalties, fines or imprisonment. Regulation of Companion Diagnostics in the EU In the EEA, companion diagnostics are deemed to be in vitro diagnostic medical devices (IVDs), and are governed by Regulation 2017/746 (IVDR), which entered into application on May 26, 2022, repealing and replacing Directive 98/79/EC. The IVDR defines a companion diagnostic as a device which is essential for the safe and effective use of a corresponding medicinal product to: (a) identify, before and/or during treatment, patients who are most likely to benefit from the corresponding medicinal product; or (b) identify, before and/or during treatment, patients likely to be at increased risk of serious adverse reactions as a result of treatment with the corresponding medicinal product. The IVDR and its associated guidance documents and harmonized standards govern, among other things, device design and development, preclinical and clinical or performance testing, premarket conformity assessment, registration and listing, manufacturing, labeling, storage, claims, sales and distribution, export and import and post-market surveillance, vigilance, and market surveillance. IVDs, including companion diagnostics, must conform with 25 the general safety and performance requirements (GSPRs), of the IVDR. Compliance with these requirements is a prerequisite to be able to affix the CE mark to devices, without which they cannot be marketed or sold in the EEA. To demonstrate compliance with the GSPR laid down in Annex I to the IVDR, and obtain the right to affix the CE mark, IVD manufacturers must conduct a conformity assessment procedure, which varies according to the type of IVD and its classification. Apart from low risk IVDs (Class A which are not sterile), in relation to which the manufacturer may issue an EU Declaration of Conformity based on a self-assessment of the conformity of its products with the GSPRs, a conformity assessment procedure requires the intervention of a Notified Body, which is an organization designated by a Competent Authority of an EEA country to conduct conformity assessments. Depending on the relevant conformity assessment procedure, the Notified Body audits and examines the technical documentation and the quality system for the manufacture, design and final inspection of the medical devices. The Notified Body issues a CE Certificate of Conformity following successful completion of a conformity assessment procedure conducted in relation to the medical device and its manufacturer and their conformity with the GSPRs. This Certificate and the related conformity assessment process entitles the manufacturer to affix the CE mark to its medical devices after having prepared and signed a related EC Declaration of Conformity. Companion diagnostics must undergo a conformity assessment by a Notified Body. If the related medicinal product has, or is in the process of, being authorized through the centralized procedure for the authorization of medicinal products, the notified body will, before it can issue a CE Certificate of Conformity, be required to seek a scientific opinion from the EMA on the suitability of the companion diagnostic for use in relation to the medicinal product concerned. For medicinal products that have or are in the process of authorization through any other route provided in EU legislation, the Notified Body must seek the opinion of the national competent authority of an EU Member State. Coverage and Reimbursement Sales of our products and our product candidates, if approved, will depend, in part, on the extent to which our products will be covered by third-party payors, such as government health programs, commercial insurance and managed healthcare organizations. There is significant uncertainty related to third-party payor coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the U.S., for example, principal decisions about reimbursement for new products are typically made by CMS. CMS decides whether and to what extent a new product will be covered and reimbursed under Medicare, and private third-party payors often follow CMS’s decisions regarding coverage and reimbursement to a substantial degree. However, no uniform policy of coverage and reimbursement for drug products exists. Accordingly, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any of our products will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. Increasingly, third-party payors are requiring that drug companies provide them with predetermined discounts from list prices and are challenging the prices charged for medical products. Further, such payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity and reviewing the cost effectiveness of medical product candidates. There may be especially significant delays in obtaining coverage and reimbursement for newly approved drugs. Third-party payors may limit coverage to specific product candidates on an approved list, known as a formulary, which might not include all FDA-approved drugs for a particular indication. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost effectiveness of our products. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. Additionally, coverage policies and third-party reimbursement rates may change at any time. Even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products for which we receive regulatory approval, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future. The Medicare Prescription Drug, Improvement, and Modernization Act of 2003 (“MMA”), established the Medicare Part D program to provide a voluntary prescription drug benefit to Medicare beneficiaries. Under Part D, Medicare beneficiaries may enroll in prescription drug plans offered by private entities that provide coverage of outpatient prescription drugs. Unlike Medicare Part A and B, Part D coverage is not standardized. While all Medicare drug plans must give at least a standard level of coverage set by Medicare, Part D prescription drug plan sponsors are not required to pay for all covered Part D drugs, and each drug plan can develop its own drug formulary that identifies which drugs it will cover and at what tier or level. However, Part D prescription drug formularies must include drugs within each therapeutic category and class of covered Part D drugs, though not necessarily all the drugs in each category or class. Any formulary used by a Part D prescription drug plan must be developed and reviewed by a 26 pharmacy and therapeutic committee. Government payment for some of the costs of prescription drugs may increase demand for products for which we receive marketing approval. However, any negotiated prices for our products covered by a Part D prescription drug plan likely will be lower than the prices we might otherwise obtain. Moreover, while the MMA applies only to drug benefits for Medicare beneficiaries, private third-party payors often follow Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own payment rates. In addition, in case a drug product needs companion diagnostics, then companion diagnostic tests require coverage and reimbursement separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement for their companion pharmaceutical or biological products. Similar challenges to obtaining coverage and reimbursement, applicable to pharmaceutical or biological products, will apply to companion diagnostics. Further, recently, in the U.S. there has been heightened governmental scrutiny of the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products. Pricing pressures can arise from rules and practices of managed care organizations, judicial decisions and governmental laws and regulations related to Medicare, Medicaid, healthcare reform, pharmaceutical reimbursement policies and pricing in general. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (“HHS”) imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. In addition, HHS has been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least 7 years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to 20 products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize IBTROZI or any of our product candidates that we develop. In addition, in most foreign countries, the proposed pricing for a drug must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing drug pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. For example, in the EEA, some countries may restrict the range of products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement. Other countries may control the prices of medicinal products for human use or allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. Such pricing negotiations with governmental authorities can take considerable time after receipt of marketing approval for a product. Political, economic and regulatory developments may further complicate pricing negotiations. In addition, other countries 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 (“HTAs”)) in order to obtain reimbursement or pricing approval. HTAs of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in EEA countries, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States. In December 2021, Regulation No 2021/2282 on HTA, was adopted in the EU. This Regulation, which entered into application on January 12, 2025 and has a phased implementation, is intended to boost cooperation among EU Member States in assessing health technologies, including new medicinal products, and providing the basis for cooperation at EU level for joint clinical assessments in these areas. The Regulation initially applies to new active substances for oncology and ATMPs. It will be expanded to orphan medicinal products in January 2028, and to all centrally authorized medicinal products as of 2030. Select high-risk medical devices also came into scope in 2026. The Regulation permits EU Member States to use common HTA tools, methodologies, and procedures across the EU, working together in four main areas, including joint clinical assessment of the innovative health technologies with the most potential impact for patients, joint scientific consultations whereby developers can seek advice from HTA authorities, identification of emerging health technologies to identify promising technologies early, and continuing voluntary cooperation in other areas. Individual EU Member States continue to be responsible for assessing non-clinical (e.g., economic, social, ethical) aspects of health technologies, and making decisions on pricing and reimbursement. In addition, some EEA countries may approve a specific price for a product, or they may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the product on the market. Other EEA countries allow companies to fix their own prices for products but monitor and control prescription volumes and issue guidance to physicians to limit prescriptions. 27 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. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the U.S. and generally prices tend to be significantly lower. Healthcare Reform The U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price-controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. For example, the Affordable Care Act substantially changed the way healthcare is financed by both the government and private insurers and continues to significantly impact the U.S. pharmaceutical industry. Since its enactment, there have been executive, judicial and Congressional challenges and amendments to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (“OBBBA”), was signed into law, which narrowed access to Affordable Care Act marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired Affordable Care Act subsidies. It is possible that the Affordable Care Act will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how any such challenges and other litigation, and the healthcare reform measures of the second Trump administration will impact the Affordable Care Act. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted in the U.S. since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. These changes included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, effective April 1, 2013, which, due to subsequent legislative amendments, will stay in effect until 2032, unless additional congressional action is taken. These and other future healthcare reform measures may result in additional reductions in Medicare and other healthcare funding, which could have a material adverse effect on customers for our drugs, if approved, and accordingly, our financial operations. Additionally, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over the manner in which drug manufacturers set prices for their marketed products, which has resulted in reform measures 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. The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct-to-consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare Plan," to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. 28 At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological 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. Any such approved importation plans, when implemented, may result in lower drug prices for products covered by those programs. We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state healthcare legislation in the U.S. directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare. These and any further changes in the law or regulatory framework that reduce our revenue or increase our costs could also have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Facilities Our principal executive offices are located in New York, New York, where we lease approximately 7,900 square feet of office space under a lease that terminates in 2027, with an option for us to extend the lease for an additional five years which is not reasonably assured of exercise, and in San Francisco, where we lease approximately 19,418 square feet of office space that terminates in 2029. We also occupy office space located in Burlington, Massachusetts, where we lease approximately 2,235 square feet of office space under a lease that terminates in 2027, as well as a total of approximately 1,799 square meters of office space in the People’s Republic of China, in the cities of Beijing, Guangzhou, Hangzhou and Shanghai, under leases that terminate in 2026 through 2029. Human Capital Employees As of December 31, 2025, we had 298 full-time employees, 58 of whom hold Ph.Ds, M.Ds or Pharm.Ds. Of our total workforce, 147 employees are engaged in research and development, and 151 employees in selling, general and administrative. Our workforce also includes 67 independent contractors. We have no collective bargaining agreements with our employees, and we have not experienced any work stoppages nor are we aware of any employment circumstances that are likely to disrupt work at any of our facilities. We consider our relationship with our employees to be strong. Human Capital Management We recognize that attracting, motivating and retaining talent at all levels is vital to our continued success. Our employees are a significant asset, and we aim to create an environment that is equitable, inclusive and representative in which our employees can grow and advance their careers, with the overall goal of developing, expanding and retaining our workforce to support our current pipeline and future business goals. By focusing on employee retention and engagement, we also improve our ability to support our clinical-stage platform, business and operations, and also protect the long-term interests of our securityholders. Our success also depends on our ability to attract, engage and retain a diverse group of employees. Our efforts to recruit and retain a diverse and passionate workforce include providing competitive compensation and benefits packages and ensuring we listen to our employees. We value agility, passion and teamwork, and are building an engagement environment where our employees can thrive and one that inspires exceptional contributions and professional and personal development in order to achieve our mission to significantly change the practice of oncology. Our human capital resources objectives include, as applicable, identifying, recruiting, retaining, incentivizing and integrating our existing and new employees, advisors and consultants. The principal purposes of our equity and cash incentive plans are to attract, retain and reward personnel through the granting of stock-based and cash-based compensation awards, in order to increase stockholder value and the success of our company by motivating such individuals to perform to the best of their abilities and achieve our objectives. We are committed to providing a competitive and comprehensive benefits package to our employees. Our benefits package provides a balance of protection along with the flexibility to meet the individual health and wellness needs of our employees. Diversity and Inclusion Diversity and inclusion are priorities for us. We believe that a rich culture of inclusion and diversity enables us to create, develop and fully leverage the strengths of our workforce. Our workforce comprises approximately 58% female employees and approximately 34% racial/ethnic minority employees. 29 Legal Proceedings From time to time, we may become involved in legal proceedings or be subject to claims arising in the ordinary course of our business. On July 30, 2025, Tim Patterson filed a derivative complaint (Tim Patterson, derivatively on behalf of Nuvation Bio, Inc. v. David Hung, et al. Index No. 654535/2025) (the “Action”) in the Supreme Court of the State of New York for the County of New York on behalf of Nuvation Bio against our seven current directors and one former director (the “Individual Defendants”). The Action asserts claims against the Individual Defendants for allegedly breaching their fiduciary duties to us by awarding our directors excessive compensation between 2021 and 2024 and seeks restitution from the Individual Defendants, changes to our director compensation policies and practices, and attorneys’ fees and other costs of suit. On November 12, 2025, the plaintiff voluntarily discontinued the Action without prejudice. Available Information We were incorporated in Delaware in April 2020 as a blank check company under the name Panacea Acquisition Corp. On February 10, 2021, Nuvation Bio and Panacea consummated the transactions contemplated under the Merger Agreement, following the approval at a special meeting of our stockholders. In connection with the closing of the Merger, we changed our name to Nuvation Bio Inc. We file electronically with the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC, our annual reports on Form 10-K, quarterly reports on Form 10-Q, 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. We make available on our website at www.nuvationbio.com, free of charge, copies of these reports as soon as reasonably practicable after filing these reports with, or furnishing them to, the SEC. Item 1A. Risk Factors. Our business and investing in our securities involve significant risks, some of which are described below. Before you make a decision to buy our securities, in addition to the risks and uncertainties discussed in the section titled “Cautionary Information Regarding Forward-Looking Statements,” you should carefully consider the risks and uncertainties described below together with all of the other information contained in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, including our financial statements and related notes and in the section titled “Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations.” The occurrence of any of the events or developments described in the following risk factors and the risks described elsewhere in this report could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations, cash flows, the trading price of our common stock and our growth prospects. Additional risks and uncertainties not presently known to us or that we currently deem immaterial may also impair our business operations. This report on Form 10-K also contains forward-looking statements that involve risks and uncertainties. Our actual results could differ materially from those anticipated in the forward-looking statements as a result of factors that are described in the following risk factors and the risks described elsewhere in this report. Risks Related to Commercialization of IBTROZI Our near-term prospects are significantly dependent on the commercialization of IBTROZI. If we are unable to successfully commercialize IBTROZI, our ability to generate meaningful revenue or achieve profitability will be materially and adversely affected. In June 2025, we received FDA approval to commercialize IBTROZI in the U.S. for the treatment of adult patients with locally advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC, and we initiated a commercial launch of IBTROZI in the U.S. in that indication. IBTROZI is our only product approved for marketing by the FDA, and our ability to generate revenue from product sales and achieve profitability is mostly dependent on our ability to successfully commercialize IBTROZI in the U.S. We may not be able to successfully commercialize IBTROZI for a number of reasons, including: • we may not be able to establish or demonstrate in the medical community the safety and efficacy of IBTROZI and its potential advantages over existing treatments; • physicians may be reluctant to prescribe IBTROZI until longer-term efficacy and safety data exists; 30 • the length of time that patients who are prescribed IBTROZI remain on treatment may be shorter than we anticipate; • our limited historical experience in marketing, selling and distributing IBTROZI; • our ability to access or reach prescribers; • the reimbursement and coverage policies of government and private payors such as Medicare, Medicaid, insurance companies, health maintenance organizations and other plan administrators; • our ability to influence testing and appropriate patient identification processes within accounts, especially in the community setting where testing and patient identification rates are lower than in the academic setting; • the relative price of IBTROZI as compared to alternative treatment options; • the relatively low incidence and prevalence of patients in IBTROZI’s approved indication, including the reliability of our market and sales estimates; • future competitive or other market factors that may adversely affect the commercial potential of IBTROZI; • we may not be able to obtain and maintain regulatory approvals for taletrectinib in any other jurisdictions or for any other indications; • changed or increased regulatory restrictions; • changes to the label for IBTROZI that could restrict how we market and sell IBTROZI, including adverse events observed in ongoing and future studies of taletrectinib such as TRUST-I and TRUST-II; • the capabilities of third-party manufacturers may adversely affect the success of our commercialization of IBTROZI; and • we may not be able to maintain adequate commercial supplies of IBTROZI to meet demand. Moreover, successful commercialization of IBTROZI may not generate sufficient revenue from product sales, and we may not become profitable in the near term, or at all. If we are unable to successfully commercialize IBTROZI, our ability to generate meaningful revenue from product sales and achieve profitability will be materially and adversely affected, which in turn would severely and adversely affect our financial results, business and business prospects. We have limited experience as a commercial company and our sales, marketing, and distribution of IBTROZI may be unsuccessful or less successful than anticipated. As a company, we have limited experience in selling and marketing or commercializing an approved drug product in the U.S., and no such experience outside of the U.S. The success of our U.S. commercialization efforts is subject to, among other things, managing our internal sales, marketing, and distribution capabilities and our ability to navigate the significant expenses and risks involved with the management of such capabilities. For example, our commercial launch of IBTROZI in the U.S. may not continue as planned or anticipated, which may require us to, among others, adjust or amend our commercialization plan and incur significant expenses. If we are unsuccessful in accomplishing our objectives or if our commercialization efforts do not continue as planned, we may not be able to successfully commercialize IBTROZI, we may require significant additional capital and financial resources, we may not become profitable, and we may not be able to compete against more established companies in our industry, any of which would severely and adversely affect our financial results, business and business prospects. Given our limited experience in marketing and selling IBTROZI in the U.S., our initial estimate of the size of the required sales force may be materially more or less than the size of the sales force actually required to effectively commercialize IBTROZI. As such, we may be required to hire substantially more sales representatives and medical support liaisons to adequately support the commercialization of IBTROZI, or we may incur excess costs as a result of hiring more sales representatives and medical support liaisons than necessary. 31 If the market opportunities for IBTROZI are smaller than we believe, our revenue may be adversely affected, and our business may suffer. We are commercializing IBTROZI in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC, and the addressable patient population in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC is based on our estimates. These estimates, which have been derived from a variety of sources, including scientific literature, surveys of clinics, patient foundations and market research, may prove to be incorrect. Further, new information from us or others may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of patients with advanced ROS1+ NSCLC. We may be unable to successfully identify patients and achieve a significant market share in IBTROZI’s approved indication. Our market opportunity may also be limited by the pricing, reimbursement and access we are able to achieve for IBTROZI, the quality and expiration of our intellectual property rights and regulatory exclusivity, duration of IBTROZI treatment in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC and future competitor treatments that enter the market. If any of our estimates prove to be inaccurate, the market opportunities for IBTROZI that we or any potential future collaborative partners develop could be significantly diminished, which would have a material adverse impact on our business and business prospects, and would adversely affect our ability to achieve profitability. IBTROZI may fail to achieve the degree of market acceptance by physicians, patients, third-party payors and others in the medical community necessary for commercial success. If IBTROZI does not achieve an adequate level of acceptance, we may not generate significant product revenues and we may never become profitable. For example, current approved immunotherapies, and other cancer treatments like chemotherapy and radiation therapy, are well established in the medical community, and doctors may continue to rely on these therapies. The degree of market acceptance of IBTROZI will depend on a number of factors, including: • the ability of IBTROZI to treat advanced ROS1+ NSCLC, as compared with other available drugs, treatments or therapies; • the prevalence and severity of any adverse side effects associated with our product candidates; • the label and promotional claims allowed by the FDA for IBTROZI and any limitations or warnings about the prevalence or severity of any side effects; • limitations or warnings contained in the labeling approved for our product candidates by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities; • availability of alternative treatments; • the size of the target patient population, and the willingness of the target patient population to try new therapies and of physicians to prescribe these therapies; • the effectiveness of sales, marketing and distribution support for IBTROZI; • the ability of the third-party distributors and specialty pharmacies we contract with to process prescriptions and dispense IBTROZI and the processes required to place orders with such distributors and specialty pharmacies; • the pricing and cost effectiveness of IBTROZI, both in absolute terms and relative to alternative treatments; • the extent to which IBTROZI is approved for inclusion on formularies in hospitals and managed care organizations; • our ability to obtain sufficient third-party coverage and adequate reimbursement; and • the willingness of patients to pay out-of-pocket in the absence of coverage by third-party payors, including governmental authorities. The successful commercialization of IBTROZI and our product candidates will depend in part on the extent to which governmental authorities and health insurers establish adequate coverage, reimbursement levels and pricing policies. Failure to obtain or maintain adequate coverage and reimbursement for IBTROZI or our product 32 candidates, if approved, could limit our ability to market those products and decrease our ability to generate revenue. The availability and adequacy of coverage and reimbursement by governmental healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid in the U.S., comparable foreign healthcare programs, private health insurers and other third-party payors are essential for most patients to be able to afford products such as IBTROZI. Our ability to achieve acceptable levels of coverage and reimbursement for products by governmental authorities, private health insurers and other organizations will have an effect on our ability to successfully commercialize IBTROZI and our product candidates, if approved, and, if desired, attract collaboration partners to invest in the development of our product candidates. Coverage under certain government programs, such as Medicare, Medicaid, the 340B drug pricing program and TRICARE, or comparable foreign healthcare programs, may not be available for IBTROZI and certain of our product candidates, if approved. Assuming we obtain coverage for a given product 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 U.S., European Union Member States, China or elsewhere will be available for any product that we may develop, and any reimbursement that may become available may be decreased or eliminated in the future. Third-party payors increasingly are challenging prices charged for pharmaceutical products and services, and many third-party payors may refuse to provide coverage and reimbursement for particular drugs when an equivalent generic drug, biosimilar or a less expensive therapy is available. It is possible that a third-party payor may consider our product candidates and other therapies as substitutable and only offer to reimburse patients for the less expensive product. Even if we show improved efficacy or improved convenience of administration with our product candidates, pricing of existing drugs may limit the amount we will be able to charge for our product candidates. These payors may deny or revoke the reimbursement status of a given product or establish prices for new or existing marketed products at levels that are too low to enable us to realize an appropriate return on our investment in product development. If reimbursement is not available or is available only at limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may not be able to obtain a satisfactory financial return on products that we may develop. There is significant uncertainty related to the insurance coverage and reimbursement of newly approved products. In the U.S., third-party payors, including private and governmental payors, such as the Medicare and Medicaid programs, play an important role in determining the extent to which new drugs and biologics will be covered. The Medicare and Medicaid programs increasingly are used as models for how private payors and other governmental payors develop their coverage and reimbursement policies for drugs and biologics. Some third-party payors may require pre-approval of coverage for new or innovative devices or drug therapies before they will reimburse healthcare providers who use such therapies. It is difficult to predict at this time what third-party payors will decide with respect to the coverage and reimbursement for our product candidates. Taletrectinib is also approved in China for the treatment of advanced ROS1+ NSCLC and sold under the brand name DOVBLREON. In China, the Ministry of Human Resources and Social Security of China or provincial or local human resources and social security authorities, together with other government authorities, review the inclusion or removal of drugs from China’s National Drug Catalog for Basic Medical Insurance, Work-related Injury Insurance and Maternity Insurance, or the National Reimbursement Drug List (“NRDL”), or provincial or local medical insurance catalogues for the National Medical Insurance Program regularly, and the tier under which a drug will be classified, both of which affect the amounts reimbursable to program participants for their purchases of those drugs. There can be no assurance that taletrectinib or any of our product candidates, if approved, will be included in the NRDL. Products included in the NRDL have been typically generic and essential drugs. Innovative drugs similar to taletrectinib have historically been more limited on their inclusion in the NRDL due to the affordability of the government’s Basic Medical Insurance, although this has been changing in recent years. Obtaining and maintaining reimbursement status is time-consuming and costly. No uniform policy for coverage and reimbursement for products exists among third-party payors in the U.S. Therefore, coverage and reimbursement for products can differ significantly from payor to payor. As a result, the coverage determination process is often a time-consuming and costly process that will require us to provide scientific and clinical support for the use of our products to each payor separately, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be applied consistently or obtained in the first instance. Furthermore, rules and regulations regarding reimbursement change frequently, in some cases at short notice, and we believe that changes in these rules and regulations are likely. Moreover, increasing efforts by governmental and third-party payors in the U.S. and abroad to cap or reduce healthcare costs may cause such organizations to limit both coverage and the level of reimbursement for newly 33 approved products and, as a result, they may not cover or provide adequate payment for our product candidates. For example, HHS imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. In addition, HHS has been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source drugs that have been on the market for at least 7 years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to 20 products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. If coverage and adequate reimbursement are not available, or are available only to limited levels, we may not be able to successfully commercialize IBTROZI and our product candidates that we develop, which could have an adverse effect on our operating results and our overall financial condition. We expect to experience pricing pressures in connection with the sale of any of our product candidates due to the trend toward managed healthcare, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes. The downward pressure on healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription drugs, has become very intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. The continuing efforts of the government, insurance companies, managed care organizations and other payors of health care services to contain or reduce costs of health care may adversely affect: • the demand for any products for which we may obtain regulatory approval; • our ability to set a price that we believe is fair for our products; • our ability to obtain coverage and reimbursement approval for a product; • our ability to generate revenues and achieve or maintain profitability; and • the amount of taxes that we are required to pay. In addition, in case a drug product needs companion diagnostics, then companion diagnostic tests require coverage and reimbursement separate and apart from the coverage and reimbursement for the pharmaceutical or biological product. Similar challenges to obtaining coverage and reimbursement, applicable to pharmaceutical or biological products, will apply to companion diagnostics. We rely on a select network of third-party distributors, specialty pharmacies and other vendors to distribute IBTROZI in the U.S., and any failure by such distributors, specialty pharmacies and vendors could adversely affect our revenues, financial condition, or results of operations. We rely on a select network of third-party distributors, specialty pharmacies and other vendors to distribute IBTROZI in the U.S., and the financial failure of any of these parties could adversely affect our revenues, financial condition or results of operations. We rely on such distributors and specialty pharmacies to effectively distribute IBTROZI in a timely manner, provide certain patient support services, manage prescription intake, collect accurate patient and inventory data and collect payments from payors. While we have entered into agreements with each of these parties, they may not perform as agreed, our strategic priorities may change or they may terminate their agreements with us. Further, an inability by our distributors or specialty pharmacies to meet our patients’ needs may lead to reputational harm or patient loss. In the event that such network fails to properly meet our or our patients’ needs, we may need to partner with other distributors, specialty pharmacies or vendors to replace or supplement our current network and there is no guarantee that we will be able to do so on commercially reasonable terms or at all. If competitors develop products, product candidates or technologies that are superior to or more cost-effective than IBTROZI, it would significantly impact the development and commercial viability of IBTROZI, which would severely and adversely affect our financial results, business and business prospects, and the future of IBTROZI, and might cause us to cease operations. The pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries are characterized by intense and dynamic competition with rapidly advancing technologies and a strong emphasis on proprietary products. IBTROZI competes with other products and therapies that currently exist, are being developed or will in the future be developed, some of which we may not currently be aware of. Competitors may develop more commercially desirable or affordable products than IBTROZI. Competitors have developed, or are in the process of developing, technologies that are, or in the future may be, competitive to 34 IBTROZI. Some of these products may have an entirely different approach or means of accomplishing therapeutic effects similar or superior to those that may be demonstrated by IBTROZI. Competitors may develop products that are safer, more effective, or less costly than IBTROZI, or more convenient to administer to patients and, therefore, present a serious competitive threat to IBTROZI. In addition, competitors may price their products below what we may determine to be an acceptable price for IBTROZI, may receive better third-party payor coverage and/or reimbursement, or may be more cost-effective than IBTROZI. Such competitive products or activities by competitors may render IBTROZI obsolete, which may cause us to cease any further development or future commercialization of IBTROZI, which would severely and adversely affect our financial results, business and business prospects, and the future of IBTROZI. If we are unable to maintain our agreements with third parties to sell and market taletrectinib in jurisdictions outside of the U.S. or our partnered territories, we will be unable to successfully commercialize taletrectinib if and when it is approved in such jurisdictions. We have out-licensed commercial rights to taletrectinib to Innovent in mainland China, Hong Kong, Macau and Taiwan; to NK in Japan; and to Eisai in Europe and other territories. In the future, we may choose to build a focused sales and marketing infrastructure to sell, or participate in sales activities with our collaborators for, taletrectinib in territories outside of the U.S. and territories subject to existing partnerships, or for our other product candidates if and when they are approved. There are risks involved with both establishing our own sales and marketing capabilities and entering into arrangements with third parties to perform these services. For example, recruiting and training a sales force is expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch. If the commercial launch of a product candidate for which we recruit a sales force and establish marketing capabilities is delayed or does not occur for any reason, we would have prematurely or unnecessarily incurred these commercialization expenses. This may be costly, and our investment would be lost if we cannot retain or reposition our sales and marketing personnel. Factors that may inhibit our efforts to commercialize our product candidates on our own include: • our inability to recruit and retain adequate numbers of effective sales and marketing personnel; • the inability of sales personnel to obtain access to physicians or educate adequate numbers of physicians on the benefits of prescribing any future product candidates; • the lack of complementary products offered by sales personnel, which may put us at a competitive disadvantage relative to companies with more extensive product lines; and • unforeseen costs and expenses associated with creating an independent sales and marketing organization. If we enter into arrangements with third parties to perform sales, marketing and distribution services, our product revenues or the profitability of these product revenues to us are likely to be lower than if we were to market and sell any products that we develop ourselves. In addition, we may not be successful in entering into arrangements with third parties to sell and market our product candidates or may be unable to do so on terms that are favorable to us. In entering into third-party marketing or distribution arrangements, any revenue we receive will depend upon the efforts of the third parties and we cannot assure you that such third parties will establish adequate sales and distribution capabilities or devote the necessary resources and attention to sell and market our product candidates effectively. If we do not establish sales and marketing capabilities successfully, either on our own or in collaboration with third parties, we will not be successful in commercializing our product candidates. Failure by us to maintain a manufacturing supply chain to appropriately and adequately supply IBTROZI for commercial and future clinical uses would adversely affect our ability to commercialize IBTROZI and/or result in a further delay in or cessation of clinical trials, and our business and business prospects could be severely harmed. The manufacture of IBTROZI must comply with applicable regulatory standards for commercial uses and current and potential future clinical trials. The process of manufacturing IBTROZI is complex and subject to several risks, including: • the ability to consistently manufacture sufficient yields with acceptable quality control and quality assurance to meet market demand for our commercialization of IBTROZI, as well as the needs for continuing clinical trials; 35 • our ability to maintain existing commercial supply agreements and to establish additional or alternative supply agreements if necessary, including our ability to successfully transfer manufacturing technology and attain regulatory approval at any such additional or alternative suppliers; • reliance on third-party manufacturers and suppliers, whose efforts we do not control; • supply chain issues, including the timely availability of product raw materials, drug substance, and drug product and other supplies, any of which may be impacted by a number of factors, including the effects of macroeconomic or other global conditions; • shortage of qualified personnel at any of our third-party suppliers; and • regulatory acceptance and continued compliance with regulatory requirements, which vary in each country. As a result of these and other risks, we may be unable to maintain a manufacturing infrastructure and supply chain capable of providing IBTROZI for clinical and commercial use, which would delay or adversely affect our IBTROZI commercialization efforts; result in lost sales; delay or result in a cessation of our current or potential future clinical trials; delay or preclude potential future regulatory approvals of IBTROZI in other jurisdictions or indications; and could cause financial and reputational harm. Risks Related to the Regulatory Approval of IBTROZI We may be unable to maintain regulatory approval for IBTROZI in the U.S. or other jurisdictions, which would severely and adversely affect our business and business prospects. IBTROZI has been approved in the U.S., Japan and in China (sold under the brand name DOVBLREON) for the treatment of advanced ROS1+ NSCLC. Approved products are subject to extensive and ongoing regulatory requirements for manufacturing processes, labeling, packaging, distribution, adverse event reporting, storage, advertising, promotion, sampling and record-keeping. These requirements include submissions of safety and other post-marketing information and reports, registration, as well as continued compliance with current Good Manufacturing Practice (“cGMP”), regulations and Good Clinical Practice (“GCP”), for any clinical trials that we conduct post-approval, all of which may result in significant expense and limit our ability to commercialize such products. In addition, any regulatory approvals that we receive for our product candidates may also be subject to limitations on the approved indicated uses for which the product may be marketed or to the conditions of approval, or contain requirements for potentially costly post-marketing testing, including Phase 4 clinical trials, and surveillance to monitor the safety and efficacy of the product candidate. In particular, a product may not be promoted for uses that are not approved by the FDA or such other regulatory authorities as reflected in the product’s approved labeling. If we receive marketing approval for any future product candidates we may develop, physicians may nevertheless prescribe it to their patients in a manner that is inconsistent with the approved label. However, if we are found to have promoted such off-label uses, we may become subject to significant liability. The FDA’s and other regulatory authorities’ policies may change, and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent, limit or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates. For example, the U.S. Supreme Court’s June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo (the “Loper Bright decision”) overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to regulations and decisions issued by federal agencies, including the FDA, on which we rely. Any such legal challenges, if successful, could have a material impact on our business. Additionally, the Loper Bright decision may result in increased regulatory uncertainty, inconsistent judicial interpretations, and other impacts to the agency rulemaking process, any of which could adversely impact our business and operations. We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative action, either in the U.S. or abroad. If we are slow or unable to adapt to changes in existing requirements or the adoption of new requirements or policies, or if we are not able to maintain regulatory compliance, we may lose any marketing approval that we may have obtained and we may not achieve or sustain profitability. Moreover, if there are changes in the application of legislation or regulatory policies, or if problems are discovered with a product or our manufacture of a product, or if we or one of our distributors, licensees or co-marketers fails to comply with regulatory requirements, the regulators could take various actions. These include: • issuing warnings or untitled letters; 36 • seeking an injunction or imposing civil or criminal penalties or monetary fines; • suspension or imposition of restrictions on operations, including product manufacturing; • seizure or detention of products, refusal to permit the import or export of products or request that we initiate a product recall; • suspension, variation or withdrawal of our marketing authorizations; • suspension of any ongoing clinical trials; • refusal to approve pending applications or supplements to applications submitted by us; or • requiring us to conduct additional clinical trials, change our product labeling or submit additional applications for marketing authorization. If any of these events occur, our ability to sell our approved products may be impaired, and we may incur substantial additional expense to comply with regulatory requirements, which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Our regulatory approvals for taletrectinib in the U.S. and China for advanced ROS1+ NSCLC are subject to certain post-marketing requirements and/or commitments, and we may be subject to penalties or product withdrawal if we fail to comply with these regulatory requirements and commitments or if we experience unanticipated problems with taletrectinib. Our regulatory approval for IBTROZI in the U.S. in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC is subject to post-marketing requirements and commitments, including: • a pediatric study; • a multicenter cohort in TRUST-II to further characterize the PK and safety of taletrectinib 400 mg daily taken with standard meals, in patients with advanced or metastatic ROS1+ NSCLC; • a hepatic impairment clinical trial to determine the PK and safety of taletrectinib in patients with moderate and severe hepatic impairment; • clinical drug interaction studies to evaluate the effect of taletrectinib on pharmacokinetics of certain sensitive CYP and transport substrates; • a clinical trial to evaluate and inform on the exposure of taletrectinib when taken with H2-receptor antagonists; • complete TRUST-I and TRUST-II studies, including a minimum of 18 months of response and follow-up for all pivotal patients; and • an analytical and clinical validation study to support the development of a companion diagnostic. Our regulatory approval for taletrectinib in China (sold under the brand name DOVBLERON) in advanced ROS1+ NSCLC is subject to a post-marketing requirement to establish the clinical benefit of the drug in a confirmatory clinical trial. Failure to comply with these post-marketing requirements and commitments or any other regulatory requirements, or later discovery of previously unknown problems with taletrectinib, or our manufacturers, or manufacturing processes for taletrectinib, may result in actions that could severely and adversely affect our business, such as: • restrictions on taletrectinib manufacturing, distribution or use; • restrictions on labeling or marketing; • additional post-marketing requirements or commitments; warning letters, withdrawal of taletrectinib from the market; • product recalls; 37 • suspension or termination of ongoing clinical trials of taletrectinib in other indications; • significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including fines, restitutions or disgorgement of profits or revenues; • refusal to permit the import or export of taletrectinib; • product seizure or detentions; injunctions or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties; and • adverse publicity. If we or others later discover that IBTROZI or any of our future approved product candidates is less effective than previously believed or causes undesirable side effects that were not previously identified, our ability to market such approved drug could be compromised. • Clinical trials of our product candidates are conducted in carefully defined subsets of patients who have agreed to enter into clinical trials. Consequently, it is possible that our clinical trials may indicate an apparent positive effect of a product candidate that is greater than the actual positive effect, if any, or alternatively fail to identify undesirable side effects. If we, or others, discover that IBTROZI or any of our future approved product candidates are less effective than previously believed, or cause undesirable side effects, a number of potentially significant negative consequences could result, including: • withdrawal, variation, suspension or limitation by regulatory authorities of approvals of such product; • product candidate is approved under 21 CFR 314 (Subpart H, accelerated approval) or we receive a conditional marketing authorization but required confirmatory trials may fail to verify clinical benefit or we may fail to fulfill requirements of the conditional marketing authorization; • seizure of the product by regulatory authorities; • recall of the product; • restrictions on the marketing of the product or the manufacturing process for any component thereof; • requirement by regulatory authorities of additional warnings on the label, such as a “black box” warning or contraindication; • requirements that we implement a REMS, or comparable foreign strategies, or create a medication guide outlining the risks of such side effects for distribution to patients; • commitment to expensive additional safety studies prior to approval or post-marketing studies required by regulatory authorities of such product; • adverse impact on the product’s competitiveness; • initiation of regulatory investigations and government enforcement actions; • initiation of legal action against us to hold us liable for harm caused to patients; and • harm to our reputation and resulting harm to physician or patient acceptance of our products. Any of these events could prevent us from achieving or maintaining market acceptance of IBTROZI or any of our future approved product candidates, and could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Risks Related to Our Financial Position and Need for Additional Capital We are unable to predict if or when we will generate significant revenue or profits. We are incurring and have incurred net losses every year since our operations began in 2018. Losses have resulted principally from costs incurred in connection with our research and development activities, and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. Although we have recently begun to commercialize IBTROZI, our revenue and profit potential is unproven and our very limited operating history as a commercial company makes our future operating results difficult to predict. If we do not generate significant revenue from 38 commercial sales of IBTROZI, or if we experience unforeseen events or choose to make other investments in our business, we may continue to experience negative cash flow as we fund our operations and clinical development activities and research programs, and continue with the commercialization of IBTROZI. We will need to generate significant revenues to achieve consistent future profitability, and we may never achieve consistent future profitability. Even if we do become profitable in the future, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to achieve consistent future profitability could negatively impact the market price of our common stock and our ability to sustain operations. Our clinical-stage product candidates as well as our other pipeline assets will require significant further investment and regulatory approvals prior to commercialization. Our product candidates will require additional clinical development, management of clinical, preclinical and manufacturing activities, obtaining regulatory approval, obtaining manufacturing supply, build out of additional commercial infrastructure, substantial investment and significant marketing efforts, before we generate any revenues from product sales. We are not permitted to market or promote any of our product candidates before we receive regulatory approval from the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, and we may never receive such regulatory approval for any of our clinical-stage product candidates, including safusidenib, which is in a Phase 3 study. We anticipate incurring significant costs associated with launching and commercializing our current and future product candidates, including as a result of payment obligations under the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement, the Safusidenib In-License Agreement, our revenue interest financing agreement with Sagard Healthcare Partners (Delaware) II LP (the “RIF Agreement”), and our credit agreement and guaranty with Sagard Holdings Manager LP (the “Loan Agreement”). Furthermore, if the markets for patient subsets that we are targeting are not as significant as we estimate, we may not generate significant revenues from sales of such products. Our revenues will also depend, in part, upon our current collaborators’ and future collaborators’ ability to obtain regulatory approval and successfully commercialize our product candidates in their respective territories. We would continue to bear the risk that the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities such as the European Commission, the U.K. Medicines & Healthcare Products Regulatory Agency (“MHRA”) or the National Medical Product Administration of China (“NMPA”), could revoke approval, or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise that negatively impact product sales. Even if we generate sufficient revenue to achieve profitability, we may not be able to sustain or increase profitability on a quarterly or annual basis. Our failure to become and remain profitable would decrease our value and could impair our ability to raise capital, maintain our research and development efforts, expand our business or continue our operations. A decline in value also could cause you to lose all or part of your investment. We will need substantial funding to pursue our business objectives. If we are unable to receive significant revenues from the sales of our product or if we are unable to raise capital if and when needed or on favorable terms, we could be forced to delay, reduce or terminate our product development, other operations or commercialization efforts. Successful drug development and commercialization requires significant amounts of capital. We expect our expenses to increase in connection with our ongoing activities, particularly as we conduct our ongoing and planned commercialization efforts for IBTROZI, and our development and regulatory approval efforts with respect to our current and future product candidates. Our expenses could increase beyond our current expectations if the FDA, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, require us to perform clinical trials and other studies in addition to those that we currently anticipate. Accordingly, we will need to obtain substantial additional funding in connection with our continuing operations. If we are unable to raise capital when needed or on attractive terms, we will be forced to delay, reduce or terminate our research and development programs or commercialization efforts. As of December 31, 2025, we had $529.2 million in cash and investments, and an accumulated deficit of $1,115.4 million. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and marketable securities will be sufficient to fund our operations for at least the next 12 months. This estimate is based on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our available capital resources sooner than we expect. Changes may occur beyond our control that would cause us to consume our available capital before that time, including changes in and progress of our development activities and changes in regulation. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including: • the level of demand for IBTROZI; • the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for IBTROZI is available from government and health administration authorities, private health insurers, managed care programs and other third-party payors; 39 • changes in the amount of deductions from gross sales, including government-mandated rebates, chargebacks and discounts that can vary because of changes to the government discount percentage, including increases in the government discount percentage resulting from price increases we may take in the future, or due to different levels of utilization by entities entitled to government rebates and discounts and changes in patient demographics; • increases in the scope of eligibility for customers to purchase IBTROZI at the discounted government price or to obtain government-mandated rebates on purchases of IBTROZI; • changes in our cost of sales; • the timing, cost and level of investment in our sales and marketing efforts to support IBTROZI sales; • the timing and level of royalty payments under the RIF Agreement and Loan Agreement with Sagard; • the scope, rate of progress, results and costs of drug discovery, preclinical development, laboratory testing and clinical trials for our product candidates; • the number and development requirements of product candidates that we may pursue, and other indications for our current product candidates that we may pursue; • the costs, timing and outcome of regulatory review of our product candidates; • the scope and costs of manufacturing development and commercial manufacturing activities; • the cost associated with commercializing any approved product candidates; • the cost and timing of developing our ability to establish sales and marketing capabilities, if any; • the costs of preparing, filing and prosecuting patent applications, maintaining, enforcing and protecting our intellectual property rights, defending intellectual property-related claims and obtaining licenses to third-party intellectual property; • our ability to establish and maintain collaborations on favorable terms, if at all; and • the extent to which we acquire or in-license other product candidates and technologies and associated intellectual property, and payments required under such acquisitions or in-licenses. We will require additional revenues or capital to complete our planned clinical development programs for our clinical stage product candidates as well as our preclinical product candidates to obtain regulatory approval. Any additional capital raising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop and commercialize our current and future product candidates, if approved. In addition, we cannot guarantee that future financing will be available on a timely basis, in sufficient amounts or on terms acceptable to us, if at all. Moreover, the terms of any financing may adversely affect the holdings or the rights of our stockholders and our issuance of additional securities, whether equity or debt, or the market perception that such issuances are likely to occur, could cause the market price of our Common Stock to decline. If we are unable to obtain funding on a timely basis on acceptable terms, we may be required to delay, reduce or terminate one or more of our research and development programs or the commercialization of IBTROZI or any of our other product candidates if approved. This could harm our business and could potentially cause us to cease operations. Raising additional capital may cause dilution to our stockholders, restrict our operations or require us to relinquish proprietary rights. Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity offerings, debt financings, collaborations, strategic alliances and licensing arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, your ownership interest will be diluted and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect your rights as a stockholder. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as incurring additional debt, making capital expenditures or declaring dividends. 40 If we raise additional funds through collaborations, strategic alliances or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may have to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us. If we are unable to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings when needed, we may be required to delay, reduce or terminate our product development or future commercialization efforts or grant rights to third parties to develop and market product candidates that we would otherwise prefer to develop and market ourselves. Changes in tax laws or regulations that are applied adversely to us or our customers may have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could affect the tax treatment of our earnings. Any new taxes could adversely affect our business operations, and our business and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us, which could require us to pay additional taxes on a prospective or retroactive basis, as well as penalties, interest and other costs, including compliance costs. Legislation referred to as the OBBBA enacted in 2025, the Inflation Reduction Act enacted in 2022, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act enacted in 2020, and the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act enacted in 2017 (the “Tax Act”) made many significant changes to the U.S. tax laws. For example, for tax years beginning after December 31, 2024, the OBBBA restores the tax deductibility of domestic research and development expenses in the year incurred, which expenses had been required under the Tax Act to be capitalized and subsequently amortized over five years. The OBBBA did not change the tax treatment of expenses incurred in research and development activities conducted outside the United States, which expenses continue to be required to be capitalized and amortized over 15 years. We are evaluating the potential impacts this and other changes under the OBBBA may have on our business. Future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to any such legislation may affect us, and certain aspects of such legislation could be repealed or modified in future legislation or sunset in future years. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax laws. Future tax reform legislation could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense. In addition, our tax obligations (including the cost of compliance) and effective tax rate could increase, including as a result of the base erosion and profit shifting (“BEPS”) project that is being led by the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (“OECD”), and other initiatives led by the OECD. For example, the OECD is leading work on proposals, commonly referred to as “BEPS 2.0”, which have made (and are expected to continue to make) important changes to the international tax system. These proposals include, among other measures, the imposition of a minimum effective corporate tax rate on certain multinational enterprises (referred to as “Pillar Two”). A number of countries have enacted, or are in the process of enacting, core elements of the Pillar Two rules (with further provisions expected to be enacted in the future). The OECD has issued (and is expected to continue to issue further) administrative guidance providing transition and safe harbor rules in relation to the implementation of the Pillar Two proposal. For example, on January 5, 2026, the OECD published details of a proposed “side-by-side” arrangement providing for, among other things, additional safe harbors for multinational groups headquartered in certain qualifying jurisdictions, which includes the U.S. Based on our current understanding of the minimum revenue thresholds, we currently expect to be outside the scope of the Pillar Two proposals but could fall within their scope in the future. We are monitoring developments (including considering our eligibility to qualify for the relevant safe harbor rules under the proposed “side-by-side” arrangement) and evaluating the potential impacts these new rules may have on our business. Our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards and certain other tax attributes to offset taxable income or taxes may be limited. As of December 31, 2025, we had federal and state net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards of $330.6 million and $440.5 million, respectively. U.S., federal NOLs incurred in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but such federal NOL carryforwards are permitted to be used in any taxable year to offset only up to 80% of taxable income in such year. Separately, under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, (the “Internal Revenue Code”), and corresponding provisions of state law, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” which generally is defined as a greater than 50% change, by value, in its equity ownership over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOL carryforwards and other pre-change tax attributes, such as research tax credits, to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. The completion of the 2021 merger of Nuvation 41 Bio Inc. and Panacea Acquisition Corp., together with private placements and other transactions that have occurred since our inception, may have triggered such an ownership change pursuant to Section 382. We have not completed a Section 382 analysis, and therefore, there can be no assurances that our NOL carryforwards are not already limited. We also may experience ownership changes as a result of subsequent shifts in our stock ownership, some of which may be outside of our control. As a result, if we earn net taxable income, our ability to use our pre-change NOL carryforwards to offset U.S. federal taxable income may be subject to limitations, which potentially could result in increased future tax liability to us. If an ownership change occurs and our ability to use our net operating loss carryforwards is materially limited, this could harm our future operating results by effectively increasing our future tax obligations. In addition, due to changes in laws and regulations, including changes proposed or implemented by the current or a future U.S. presidential administration, such as alternative minimum taxes, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing net operating losses could become unavailable to reduce future income tax liabilities. Further, at the state level, there may be periods during which the use of NOL carryforwards is suspended or otherwise limited, which could accelerate or permanently increase state taxes owed. For example, California imposed limits on the usability of California state net operating losses to offset taxable income in tax years beginning after 2023 and before 2027. Risks Related to our Indebtedness Our level of indebtedness and debt service obligations could adversely affect our financial condition and may make it more difficult for us to fund our operations. On March 3, 2025, we announced the closing of a non-dilutive financing of up to $250.0 million from entities affiliated with Sagard Healthcare Partners (collectively, “Sagard”). The financing is comprised of a $150.0 million (the “Investment Amount”) synthetic royalty financing under the RIF Agreement and a $100.0 million senior secured term loan under the Loan Agreement. The Investment Amount and the first $50.0 million tranche of the term loan was funded on June 25, 2025, following FDA’s approval of IBTROZI. The second $50.0 million tranche of the term loan will be available at our option until June 30, 2026, because we have achieved first U.S. commercial sale of IBTROZI. Under the RIF Agreement, in exchange for the Investment Amount, we have agreed to make tiered royalty payments to Sagard on U.S. net sales of IBTROZI equal to 5.5% of annual U.S. net sales up to $600 million and 3.0% of annual U.S. net sales between $600 million and $1 billion. We will retain all annual U.S. net sales above $1 billion. Our obligation to make the royalty payments will cease upon the earliest occurrence of total royalty payments reaching 1.6 times of the Investment Amount by the calendar quarter ending on June 30, 2031, 1.75 times of the Investment Amount by the calendar quarter ending on June 30, 2034, or 2.0 times of the Investment Amount thereafter. To the extent we have not made royalty payments totaling at least 1.0 time of the Investment Amount by February 1, 2043, we will be required to make a true up payment in an amount equal to such shortfall (the “True Up Payment”). In addition, if certain events occur, including certain bankruptcy events, non-payment of Payments, a change of control, expiration or termination of certain intellectual property rights or marketing authorization, an out-license or sale of all of the rights in and to IBTROZI in the United States and (subject to applicable cure periods) non-compliance with the covenants in the RIF Agreement, we may be required to repurchase the synthetical royalty financing at a repurchase price ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 times of the Investment Amount, depending on the time of such event, less all royalty payments we made by then (the “Put/Call Payment”). Under the Loan Agreement, the term loan will bear interest at the secured overnight financing rate ("SOFR") plus a margin of 6.00%, subject to a 4.00% SOFR floor. There are no scheduled amortization payments associated with the term loan, with all outstanding principal due at maturity. If available, we must first satisfy ourselves that we will have access to future alternate sources of capital, such as from commercial revenues or the equity capital markets or debt capital markets, in order to repay any additional principal borrowed, which we may be unable to do, in which case, our liquidity and ability to fund our operations may be substantially impaired. All obligations under the Loan Agreement are secured by substantially all of our assets, including our intellectual property, and all obligations under the RIF Agreement are secured by accounts receivable arising from U.S. net sales of IBTROZI and intellectual property, product registrations and regulatory approvals related to commercialization and development of IBTROZI in the United States. Further, the terms of the Loan Agreement and the RIF Agreement place restrictions on our operating and financial flexibility, and limit or prohibit our ability to dispose of certain assets and engage in other significant transactions. This indebtedness may create additional financing risk for us, particularly if our business or prevailing financial market conditions are not conducive to paying off or refinancing the outstanding debt obligations at maturity. As we draw down any of the tranches under the Loan Agreement, our indebtedness will 42 increase, which would further increase our risk of being unable to pay off or refinance our outstanding debt obligations at maturity. Our indebtedness could also have important negative consequences, including: • we will need to make tiered royalty payments under the RIF Agreement, and under certain circumstances, the True Up Payment or the Put/Call Payment, and to repay the Loan Agreement by making payments of interest and principal, all of which will reduce the amount of cash available to finance our operations, our research and development efforts and other general corporate activities; • our failure to comply with the obligations of our affirmative and restrictive covenants in the Loan Agreement and the RIF Agreement could result in an event of default that, if not cured or waived, would permit Sagard to accelerate our obligation to repay this indebtedness, and Sagard could seek to enforce their security interest against certain of our assets that are collateral; and • under the RIF Agreement, upon occurrence of certain events, we may be required to repurchase the synthetical royalty financing at a repurchase price ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 times of the Investment Amount, depending on the time of such event, less all royalty payments we made by then. In addition, we may borrow additional capital in the future to fund clinical development and our future growth, including pursuant to the Loan Agreement or potentially pursuant to new arrangements with different lenders. To the extent additional debt is added to our current debt levels, the risks described above could increase. The terms of the Loan Agreement and the RIF Agreement place restrictions on our operating and financial flexibility. The Loan Agreement and the RIF Agreement collectively impose operating and other restrictions on us. Such restrictions will affect, and in many respects limit or prohibit, our ability and the ability of our subsidiaries to, among other things: • dispose of certain assets; • engage in mergers, acquisitions or consolidations; • incur additional indebtedness; • create liens on assets; • enter into certain licensing transactions; • make certain payments; • pay dividends and make contributions or repurchase our capital stock; and • engage in certain transactions with affiliates. We may not have cash available in an amount sufficient to enable us to make interest, principal or other payments on our indebtedness when due. Our ability to make scheduled interest payments on or to refinance our indebtedness depends on our future performance and ability to raise additional sources of cash, which is subject to economic, financial, competitive and other factors beyond our control. If we are unable to generate sufficient cash to service our debt, we may be required to adopt one or more alternatives, such as selling assets, restructuring our debt or obtaining additional equity capital on terms that may be onerous or highly dilutive. If we desire to refinance our indebtedness, our ability to do so will depend on the state of the capital and lending markets and our financial condition at such time. We may not be able to engage in any of these activities or engage in these activities on desirable terms, which could result in a default on our debt obligations. Failure to satisfy our current and future debt obligations under the Loan Agreement, the RIF Agreement, or to comply with certain covenants in such agreements could result in an event of default, the occurrence and continuance of which provides Sagard with the right to demand immediate repayment of all outstanding obligations under such agreements (and in the case of certain insolvency, liquidation, bankruptcy or similar events, automatically requires 43 immediate repayment of all outstanding obligations under such agreements), and to exercise remedies against us and the collateral securing such agreements. These events of default include, among other things: • failure to make payments required by the agreements; • insolvency, liquidation, bankruptcy or similar events; • failure to observe covenants under the Loan Agreement, the RIF Agreement, and ancillary collateral documents, which failure, in certain limited cases, is not cured within applicable time periods; • withdrawal of FDA’s authorization of IBTROZI and certain other regulatory actions; • the occurrence of a material adverse change; • material misrepresentations; • certain cross-default of third-party indebtedness or certain default or termination events of hedging assessments; • certain money judgments being entered against us which are not timely paid, discharged or stayed; and • our assets are attached or seized. In the event of default, the lenders could accelerate all of the amounts due under the Loan Agreement or the RIF Agreement, as applicable. Sagard could also exercise its rights to take possession and dispose of certain of our assets that are collateral. In addition, under the RIF Agreement, if certain events occur, including certain bankruptcy events, non-payment of Payments, a change of control, expiration or termination of certain intellectual property rights or marketing authorization, an out-license or sale of all of the rights in and to IBTROZI in the United States and (subject to applicable cure periods) non-compliance with the covenants in the RIF Agreement, we may be required to repurchase the synthetical royalty financing at a repurchase price ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 times of the Investment Amount, depending on the time of such event, less all royalty payments we made by then. Under such circumstances, we may not have enough available cash or be able to raise additional funds through equity or debt financings to repay such indebtedness at the time of such acceleration. In that case, we may be required to delay, limit, reduce or terminate our IBTROZI commercialization efforts, our research and development efforts, or grant to others rights to develop and market IBTROZI. Our business, financial condition and results of operations could be materially adversely affected as a result of any of these events. The RIF Agreement place certain restrictions on our operational flexibility The RIF Agreement contains covenants that impose on us certain obligations with respect to commercial effort, reporting, indemnification and other matters and certain restrictions with respect to intellectual property transfers, licensing, acquisitions, divestitures, and other actions. The RIF Agreement also limits our ability to create or incur liens or dispose of certain assets related to taletrectinib. If we want to early terminate the RIF Agreement, we will need to pay Sagard an amount ranging from 1.4 to 2.0 times of the Investment Amount (depending on the timing of the early termination and less all royalty payments we made by then), thereby limiting our ability to eliminate future applicability of the covenants contained in the RIF Agreement. Compliance with these covenants may limit our flexibility in operating our business and our ability to take actions that might otherwise be advantageous to us and our stockholders. Risks Related to the Development of our Product Candidates If we do not obtain regulatory approval for and successfully commercialize additional product candidates or we experience significant delays in doing so, we may incur significant losses. Our business currently depends heavily on the successful development, regulatory approval and, if approved, commercialization of one or more of our current or future product candidates, such as safusidenib. We cannot be certain that any of these or any other product candidates will receive regulatory approval or will be successfully commercialized even if we receive regulatory approval. The research, testing, manufacturing, safety, efficacy, labeling, approval, sale, marketing and distribution of product candidates is, and will remain, subject to comprehensive 44 regulation by the FDA and similar foreign regulatory authorities. Before obtaining regulatory approvals for the commercial sale of any product candidate, we must demonstrate through preclinical studies and clinical trials that the product candidate is safe and effective for use in each target indication. The FDA and similar foreign regulatory authorities may not agree that the clinical data demonstrates safety and efficacy of our product candidates. Drug development is a long, expensive and uncertain process, and delay or failure can occur at any stage of any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials. For example, based on clinical experience since February 2022, we have discontinued or deprioritized three clinical-stage programs. Failure to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates will prevent us from commercializing and marketing our product candidates. The success of our product candidates will depend on several additional factors, including: • successful completion of preclinical studies; • successful initiation of clinical trials; • successful patient enrollment in, and completion, of clinical trials that demonstrate their safety and efficacy; • receiving marketing approvals from applicable regulatory authorities; • obtaining, maintaining, protecting and enforcing patent, trade secret and other intellectual property rights and regulatory exclusivity for our product candidates; • completing any post-marketing studies required by applicable regulatory authorities; • making and maintaining arrangements with third-party manufacturers, or establishing manufacturing capabilities, for both clinical and commercial supplies of our product candidates; • establishing sales, marketing and distribution capabilities and successfully launching commercial sales of our products, if and when approved, whether alone or in collaboration with others; • the prevalence and severity of adverse events experienced with our product candidates; • acceptance of our product candidates by patients, the medical community and third-party payors; • maintaining a continued acceptable safety profile of the products following approval; • obtaining and maintaining healthcare coverage and adequate reimbursement for our product candidates; • competing effectively with other cancer therapies, including with respect to the sales and marketing of our product candidates, if approved; and • obtaining licenses to any third-party intellectual property we deem necessary or desirable. Many of these factors are beyond our control, including the time needed to adequately complete preclinical studies, clinical testing and the regulatory submission process, our ability to obtain and protect intellectual property rights and changes in the competitive landscape. It is possible that none of our current or future product candidates will ever obtain regulatory approval, even if we expend substantial time and resources seeking such approval. If we do not achieve one or more of these factors in a timely manner or at all, we could experience significant delays or an inability to successfully complete clinical trials, obtain regulatory approval or, if approved, commercialize our product candidates, which would materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. In addition, the clinical trial requirements of the FDA, the European Union, competent authorities of EU Member States, the MHRA, the NMPA and other comparable regulatory authorities and the criteria regulators may use to determine the safety and efficacy of a product candidate vary substantially according to the type, complexity, novelty and intended use and market of the potential products. The regulatory approval process for novel product candidates can be more expensive and take longer than for other, better known or extensively studied pharmaceutical or other product candidates. We are currently conducting, and may in the future conduct, clinical trials for current or future product candidates outside the United States, and the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities may not accept data from such clinical trials. 45 We are currently conducting clinical trials outside the United States, including in China, and we expect to continue to conduct clinical trials internationally in the future. The acceptance of study data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. healthcare system practices and (ii) the clinical trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to GCP; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign study data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the study is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCPs and the FDA is able to validate the data from the study through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Additionally, the FDA’s clinical trial requirements, including sufficient size of patient populations and statistical powering, must be met. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements for clinical data gathered outside of their respective jurisdictions. In addition, such foreign clinical trials are subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the clinical trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority will accept data from clinical trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any comparable foreign regulatory authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional clinical trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in current or future product candidates that we may develop being delayed or not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our DDC platform is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any products of commercial value, or if competing technological approaches will limit the commercial value of our product candidates or render our platform obsolete. The success of our business depends in part upon our ability to identify, develop and commercialize products based on our proprietary DDC platform, which leverages a novel and unproven therapeutic approach within the drug-conjugate class of anti-cancer therapies. We have not yet demonstrated safety or efficacy for any DDC product candidate. Our research methodology and novel approach to oncology using our DDC platform may be unsuccessful in identifying additional product candidates, and any product candidates based on our technology may be shown to have harmful side effects or may have other characteristics that may necessitate additional clinical testing, or make the product candidates unmarketable or unlikely to receive marketing approval. In addition, adverse developments with respect to one of our DDC platform-based programs may have a significant adverse impact on the actual or perceived likelihood of success and value of similar programs. For example, in November 2025, we announced the discontinuation of development of NUV-1511, our first DDC clinical product candidate, due to inconsistent efficacy. In addition, the biotechnology and biopharmaceutical industries are characterized by rapidly advancing technologies. Our future success will depend in part on our ability to maintain a competitive position with our DDC platform. If we fail to stay at the forefront of technological change in utilizing our DDC platform to create and develop product candidates, we may be unable to compete effectively. Our competitors may render our DDC platform obsolete, or limit the commercial value of our product candidates, by advances in existing technological approaches or the development of new or different approaches, potentially eliminating the advantages in our drug discovery process that we believe we derive from our research approach and proprietary technologies. By contrast, adverse developments with respect to other companies that attempt to use a similar approach to our approach may adversely impact the actual or perceived value of our DDC platform and potential of our DDC platform-based product candidates. If any of these events occur, we may be forced to abandon our development efforts for a program or programs, which would harm our business. Our DDC platform-based product candidates are based on a novel technology, which makes it difficult to predict the time and cost of product candidate development. We have concentrated our product research and development efforts on our novel DDC platform, and our future success depends in part on the successful development of product candidates arising from our DDC platform. There can be no assurance that any development problems we may experience in the future related to our DDC platform will 46 not cause significant delays or unanticipated costs, or that such development problems can be efficiently solved. We may also experience delays in developing a sustainable, reproducible and scalable manufacturing process or transferring that process to commercial partners, which may prevent us from completing our clinical trials or commercializing our product candidates on a timely or profitable basis, if at all. We may in the future develop product candidates in combination with other therapies and that may expose us to additional risks. We may develop future product candidates for use in combination with one or more currently approved cancer therapies. Even if any product candidate we develop was to receive marketing approval or be commercialized for use in combination with other existing therapies, we would continue to be subject to the risks that the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities could revoke approval of the therapy used in combination with our product candidate or that safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues could arise with these existing therapies. Combination therapies are commonly used for the treatment of cancer, and we would be subject to similar risks if we develop any of our product candidates for use in combination with other drugs or for indications other than cancer. This could result in our own products being removed from the market or being less successful commercially. We may also evaluate our product candidates in combination with one or more other cancer therapies that have not yet been approved for marketing by the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities. We will not be able to market and sell our product candidates we develop in combination with any such unapproved cancer therapies that do not ultimately obtain marketing approval. If the FDA or similar foreign regulatory authorities do not approve or revoke the approval of these other drugs, or if safety, efficacy, manufacturing or supply issues arise with the drugs we choose to evaluate in combination with our product candidates, we may be unable to obtain approval of or market our product candidates. Clinical trials are very expensive, time-consuming and difficult to design and implement, and involve uncertain outcomes. Furthermore, results of earlier preclinical studies and clinical trials may not be predictive of results of future preclinical studies or clinical trials. The risk of failure for our product candidates is high. It is impossible to predict when or if any of our product candidates will prove safe or effective in humans or will receive regulatory approval. To obtain the requisite regulatory approvals to market and sell any of our product candidates, we must demonstrate through extensive preclinical studies and clinical trials that our product candidates are safe and effective in humans for use in each target indication. Preclinical investigation and clinical testing is expensive and can take many years to complete, and the outcome is inherently uncertain. Failure can occur at any time during the preclinical investigation or clinical trial process. For example, in August 2022, we announced the discontinuation of development of our former lead program, NUV-422, following the emergence of a safety signal, uveitis, which is a form of inflammation of the eye. In addition, the results of preclinical studies and earlier clinical trials may not be predictive of the results of later-stage preclinical studies or clinical trials. The results generated to date in preclinical studies for our product candidates do not ensure that later preclinical studies or clinical trials will demonstrate similar results. Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy traits despite having progressed through preclinical and earlier stage clinical trials. In later-stage clinical trials, we will likely be subject to more rigorous statistical analyses than in completed earlier stage clinical trials. A number of companies in the pharmaceutical industry have suffered significant setbacks in later-stage clinical trials due to adverse safety profiles or lack of efficacy, notwithstanding promising results in earlier trials, and we cannot be certain that we will not face similar setbacks. Moreover, preclinical and clinical data are often susceptible to varying interpretations and analyses, and many companies that have believed their product candidates performed satisfactorily in preclinical studies and clinical trials have nonetheless failed to obtain marketing approval of their products. In some instances, there can be significant variability in safety or efficacy results between different clinical trials of the same product candidate due to numerous factors, including changes in clinical trial procedures set forth in protocols, differences in the size and type of the patient populations, adherence to the dosing regimen and other clinical trial protocols, and the rate of dropout among clinical trial participants. If we fail to produce positive results in our planned preclinical studies or clinical trials of any of our product candidates, the development timeline and regulatory approval and commercialization prospects for our product candidates, and, correspondingly, our business and financial prospects, would be materially and adversely affected. 47 Interim, “topline,” and preliminary data from our clinical trials that we announce or publish from time to time may change as more patient data become available and are subject to audit and verification procedures that could result in material changes in the final data. From time to time, we may publicly disclose preliminary or topline data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials, which is based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same studies, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the preliminary data we previously published. As a result, topline data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our preclinical studies and clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. Further, others, including regulatory authorities, may not accept or agree with our assumptions, estimates, calculations, conclusions or analyses or may interpret or weigh the importance of data differently, which could impact the value of the particular program, the approvability or commercialization of the particular drug candidate or product and our company in general. In addition, the information we choose to publicly disclose regarding a particular study or clinical trial is based on what is typically extensive information, and you or others may not agree with what we determine is material or otherwise appropriate information to include in our disclosure. If the interim, topline, or preliminary data that we report differ from actual results, or if others, including regulatory authorities, disagree with the conclusions reached, our ability to obtain approval for and commercialize our product candidates may be harmed, which could harm our business, operating results, prospects or financial condition. We may encounter substantial delays in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or we may fail to demonstrate safety and efficacy to the satisfaction of applicable regulatory authorities. Before obtaining marketing approval from regulatory authorities for the sale of our product candidates, we must conduct extensive clinical trials to demonstrate the safety and efficacy of the product candidate for its intended indications. Preclinical studies and clinical trials are expensive, time-consuming and uncertain as to outcome. We cannot guarantee that any preclinical studies or clinical trials will be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all. A failure of one or more preclinical studies or clinical trials can occur at any stage of testing. Events that may prevent successful or timely completion of preclinical or clinical development include: • delays in conducting experiments or preclinical studies or unsatisfactory results from such experiments or studies; • delays in reaching a consensus with regulatory authorities on trial design, dose optimization or dose selection; • delays in reaching agreement or failing to agree on acceptable terms with prospective CROs and clinical trial sites; • delays in opening sites and recruiting suitable patients to participate in our clinical trials; • delays in enrollment due to travel or quarantine policies, or other factors, related to health epidemics, other pandemics or other events outside our control; • imposition of a clinical hold by regulatory authorities as a result of a serious adverse event, concerns with a class of product candidates or after an inspection of our clinical trial operations or trial sites; • delays in having patients complete participation in a trial or return for post-treatment follow-up; 48 • occurrence of serious adverse events associated with the product candidate that are viewed to outweigh its potential benefits; or • changes in regulatory requirements and guidance that require amending or submitting new clinical protocols. For instance, health epidemics and the measures taken in response by the governmental authorities could disrupt the supply chain and the manufacture or shipment of drug substances and finished drug products for our product candidates for use in our research and clinical trials, delay, limit or prevent our employees and CROs from continuing research and development activities, impede the ability of patients to enroll or continue in clinical trials, or impede testing, monitoring, data collection and analysis or other related activities, any of which could delay our clinical trials and increase our development costs, and have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. Any inability to timely and successfully complete preclinical and clinical development could result in additional costs to us or impair our ability to achieve regulatory and commercialization milestones. In addition, if we make manufacturing or formulation changes to our product candidates, we may need to conduct additional testing to bridge our modified product candidate to earlier versions. Clinical trial delays could also shorten any periods during which we may have the exclusive right to commercialize our product candidates, if approved, or allow our competitors to bring comparable drugs to market before we do, which could impair our ability to successfully commercialize our product candidates and may harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Additionally, if the results of our clinical trials are inconclusive or if there are safety concerns or serious adverse events associated with our product candidates, we may: • be delayed or unsuccessful in obtaining marketing approval; • obtain approval for indications or patient populations that are not as broad as intended or desired; • obtain approval with labeling that includes significant use or distribution restrictions or safety warnings; • be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; • be required to perform additional clinical trials to support approval or be subject to additional post-marketing testing requirements; • have regulatory authorities withdraw, vary or suspend, their approval of the drug or impose restrictions on its distribution in the form of a modified risk evaluation and mitigation strategy, or REMS, or comparable foreign restrictions; • be subject to the addition of labeling statements, such as warnings or contraindications; • be sued; or • experience damage to our reputation. Our drug development costs will also increase if we experience delays in testing or obtaining marketing approvals. We do not know whether any of our preclinical studies or clinical trials will begin as planned, need to be restructured or be completed on schedule, if at all. Further, we, the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities, an Institutional Review Board, or an Ethics Committee may suspend our clinical trials at any time if it appears that we or our collaborators are failing to conduct a trial in accordance with applicable regulatory requirements, including the FDA’s current GCP and foreign equivalents, regulators find that we are exposing participants to unacceptable health risks or if the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities find deficiencies in our Investigational New Drugs, clinical trial applications or the conduct of these trials. Therefore, we cannot predict with any certainty the schedule for commencement and completion of future clinical trials. If we experience delays in the commencement or completion of our clinical trials, or if we terminate a clinical trial prior to completion, the commercial prospects of our product candidates could be negatively impacted, and our ability to generate revenues from our product candidates may be delayed or eliminated entirely. 49 If we encounter continued or new difficulties enrolling patients in our clinical trials, our clinical development activities could be delayed or otherwise adversely affected. We have experienced and may in the future experience difficulties in patient enrollment in our clinical trials for a variety of reasons, including challenges resulting from health epidemics, labor shortages, and global supply chain interruptions. The timely completion of clinical trials in accordance with their protocols depends, among other things, on our ability to enroll a sufficient number of patients who remain in the study until its conclusion. The enrollment of patients depends on many factors, including: • the patient eligibility criteria defined in the protocol; • the size and health of the patient population required for analysis of the trial’s primary endpoints; • the proximity of patients to study sites; • the design of the trial; • our ability to recruit clinical trial investigators with the appropriate competencies and experience; • clinicians’ and patients’ perceptions as to the potential advantages of the product candidate being studied in relation to other available therapies, including any new drugs that may be approved for the indications we are investigating; • our ability to obtain and maintain patient consents; and • the risk that patients enrolled in clinical trials will drop out of the trials before completion. In addition, our clinical trials will compete with other clinical trials for product candidates that are in the same therapeutic areas as our product candidates, and this competition will reduce the number and types of patients available to us, because some patients who might have opted to enroll in our trials may instead opt to enroll in a trial being conducted by one of our competitors. Since the number of qualified clinical investigators is limited, we expect to conduct some of our clinical trials at the same clinical trial sites that some of our competitors use, which will reduce the number of patients who are available for our clinical trials at such clinical trial site. Moreover, because our product candidates represent a departure from more commonly used methods for cancer treatment, potential patients and their doctors may be inclined to use conventional therapies rather than enroll patients in any future clinical trial. Delays in patient enrollment may result in increased costs or may affect the timing or outcome of our current or planned clinical trials, which could prevent completion of these trials and adversely affect our ability to advance the development of our product candidates. If we or third parties are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for taletrectinib, safusidenib, or any of our other product candidates that are targeted therapies, or if we experience significant delays in doing so, we may not achieve marketing approval or realize the full commercial potential of such product candidates. A key part of our development strategy for taletrectinib, safusidenib, and any of our other product candidates that are targeted therapies, is to identify subsets of patients with specific types of tumors that express specific genetic markers. Identification of these patients may require the development and use of companion diagnostics. The FDA generally will require either approval or clearance of the diagnostic at the same time the FDA approves the therapeutic product, or as a post-marketing commitment at the time of the therapeutic product's approval. For example, IBTROZI’s approval in the U.S. is subject to a post-marketing commitment to develop a companion diagnostic. We do not have experience or capabilities in developing or commercializing diagnostics and plan to rely in large part on third parties to perform these functions. A companion diagnostic for ROS-1 positive NSCLC will require the conduct of a clinical bridging study with high sample ascertainment, as the TRUST-I and TRUST-II trials were conducted using multiple investigational devices. In the EEA, companion diagnostics are regulated as IVDs and are governed by the IVDR. IVDs, including companion diagnostics, must conform with the GSPRs of the IVDR as a prerequisite to be able to affix the CE mark to devices, without which they cannot be marketed or sold in the EEA. To demonstrate compliance with the GSPR laid down in Annex I to the IVDR, and obtain the right to affix the CE mark, companion diagnostics must undergo a conformity assessment by a Notified Body. Depending on the relevant conformity assessment procedure, the Notified Body audits and examines the technical documentation and the quality system for the manufacture, design and final inspection of the medical devices. The Notified Body issues a CE Certificate of Conformity following successful 50 completion of a conformity assessment procedure conducted in relation to the medical device and its manufacturer and their conformity with the GSPRs. In addition, before issuing the CE Certificate of Conformity, the Notified Body will be required to seek a scientific opinion from the EMA or the national competent authority of the relevant EU Member State, as applicable, on the suitability of the companion diagnostic for use in relation to the medicinal product concerned. The CE Certificate of Conformity and the related conformity assessment process entitle the manufacturer to affix the CE mark to its medical devices after having prepared and signed a related EC Declaration of Conformity. Companion diagnostics are subject to regulation by the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities as medical devices and may require separate regulatory approval or certification prior to commercialization of the associated product candidate. If we or third parties are unable to successfully develop companion diagnostics for our product candidates, or experience delays in doing so: • the development of these product candidates may be delayed because it may be difficult to identify patients for enrollment in our clinical trials in a timely manner; • these product candidates may not receive marketing approval if their safe and effective use depends on a companion diagnostic; and • we may not realize the full commercial potential of these product candidates that receive marketing approval if, among other reasons, we are unable to appropriately identify patients or types of tumors with the specific genetic alterations targeted by these product candidates. Even if our product candidates and any associated companion diagnostics are approved or certified for marketing, the need for companion diagnostics may slow or limit adoption of our product candidates. Although we believe genetic testing is becoming more prevalent in the diagnosis and treatment of cancer, our product candidates may be perceived negatively compared to alternative treatments that do not require the use of companion diagnostics, due to either the additional cost of the companion diagnostic or the need to complete additional procedures to identify genetic markers prior to administering our product candidates. If any of these events were to occur, our business and growth prospects would be harmed, possibly materially. We may expend our limited resources to pursue a particular product candidate or indication and fail to capitalize on product candidates or indications that may be more profitable or for which there is a greater likelihood of success. Because we have limited financial and managerial resources, we focus on research programs that we identify for specific indications. As a result, we may forego or delay pursuit of opportunities with other product candidates or for other indications, even those that we have begun investigating and that may have shown promise, that later prove to have greater commercial potential. Our resource allocation decisions may cause us to fail to capitalize on viable commercial therapies or profitable market opportunities. Our spending on current and future research and development programs and product candidates for specific indications may not yield any commercially viable products. If we do not accurately evaluate the commercial potential or target market for a particular product candidate, we may relinquish valuable rights to that product candidate through collaboration, licensing or other royalty arrangements in cases in which it would have been more advantageous for us to retain sole development and commercialization rights to such product candidate. We face substantial competition, which may result in others discovering, developing or commercializing products before or more successfully than we do. The development and commercialization of new drug products is highly competitive. We face competition with respect to our current product candidates and will face competition with respect to any product candidates that we may seek to develop or commercialize in the future, from major pharmaceutical, specialty pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies among others. We compete in the segments of the pharmaceutical, biotechnology and other related markets that develop therapies for the treatment of cancer. There are other companies working to develop therapies for the treatment of cancer including divisions of large pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies of various sizes. Some of these competitive products and therapies are based on scientific approaches that are the same as or similar to our approach, and others are based on entirely different approaches. Potential competitors also include academic institutions, government agencies and other public and private research organizations that conduct research, 51 seek patent protection and establish collaborative arrangements for research, development, manufacturing and commercialization. We are developing our initial product candidates for the treatment of cancer. There are already a variety of available drug therapies marketed for cancer and some of the currently approved drug therapies are branded and subject to patent protection, and others are available on a generic basis. Many of these approved drugs are well established therapies and are widely accepted by physicians, patients and third-party payors. Insurers and other third-party payors may also encourage the use of generic products. We expect that if our product candidates are approved, they will be priced at a significant premium over competitive generic products. This may make it difficult for us to achieve our business strategy of replacing existing therapies with our product candidates. Our competitors may succeed in developing, acquiring or licensing, on an exclusive basis, products that are more effective or less costly than any product candidate that we may develop. In addition, most of these companies have substantially greater sales, marketing and other experience and reserves than we do. Competition may further increase as a result of advances in the commercial applicability of technologies for drug discovery and development and greater availability of capital for investment in cancer therapies. Established pharmaceutical companies may invest heavily to accelerate discovery and development of novel compounds or to in-license novel compounds that could make our product candidates less competitive. In addition, any new product that competes with an approved product must demonstrate compelling advantages in efficacy, convenience, tolerability and safety in order to overcome price competition and to be commercially successful. Accordingly, our competitors may succeed in obtaining patent protection, discovering, developing, receiving FDA approval for or commercializing drugs before we do, which would have an adverse impact on our business and results of operations. The availability of our competitors’ products could limit the demand and the price we are able to charge for any product candidate we commercialize, if any. The inability to compete with existing or subsequently introduced drugs would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may become exposed to costly and damaging liability claims, either when testing our product candidates in the clinic or at the commercial stage, and our product liability insurance may not cover all damages from such claims. We are exposed to potential product liability and professional indemnity risks that are inherent in the research, development, manufacturing, marketing and use of pharmaceutical products. The current and future use of product candidates by us in clinical trials, and the sale of IBTROZI and any other approved products in the future, may expose us to liability claims. These claims might be made by patients who use the product, healthcare providers, pharmaceutical companies or others selling such products. Any claims against us, regardless of their merit, could be difficult and costly to defend or settle, and could compromise the market acceptance of our product candidates or any prospects for commercialization of IBTROZI or our product candidates, if approved. For more information regarding the risks associated with intellectual property-related litigation, see “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property.” Although the clinical trial process is designed to identify and assess potential side effects, it is always possible that a drug, even after regulatory approval, may exhibit unforeseen or rare side effects. If any of our product candidates were to cause adverse side effects during clinical trials or after approval of the product candidate, we may be exposed to substantial liabilities. Physicians and patients may not comply with any warnings that identify known potential adverse effects and patients who should not use our product candidates. Although we maintain product liability insurance coverage, such insurance may not be adequate to cover all liabilities that we may incur. We may need to increase our insurance coverage each time we commence a clinical trial and if we successfully commercialize any product candidate. As the expense of insurance coverage is increasing, we may not be able to maintain insurance coverage at a reasonable cost or in an amount adequate to satisfy any liability that may arise. If a successful product liability claim or series of claims is brought against us for uninsured liabilities or in excess of insured liabilities, our assets may not be sufficient to cover such claims and our business operations could be impaired. Even if we receive Fast Track designation or granting of other FDA expedited programs, or other comparable foreign expedited programs, for any of our product candidates, there is no guarantee that such product candidates will experience a faster regulatory review or obtain regulatory approval. 52 If a product is intended for the treatment of a serious or life-threatening condition and preclinical or clinical data demonstrate the potential to address an unmet medical need for this condition, the product sponsor may apply for Fast Track designation. The FDA has broad discretion whether or not to grant this designation, so even if we believe a particular product candidate is eligible for this designation, we cannot assure you that the FDA would decide to grant it. Even if we receive Fast Track designation for any of our product candidates, we may not experience a faster development process, review or approval compared to conventional FDA approval timelines, and the FDA may still decline to approve such product candidates. The FDA may rescind the Fast Track designation if it believes that the designation is no longer supported by data from our clinical development program or for any other reason. Similarly, the FDA’s other expedited drug development programs (e.g., Breakthrough Therapy, Accelerated Approval, Priority Review) do not guarantee a product candidate’s faster regulatory review or regulatory approval. The EMA has a similar program called PRIME. Even if we receive Orphan Drug designation for any of our product candidates, we may be unable to maintain the benefits associated with such designation, including the potential for market exclusivity. Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States and the EU, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as Orphan Drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may designate a drug as an Orphan Drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, Orphan Drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax credits for certain clinical trial costs and user-fee waivers. Generally, if a drug with an Orphan Drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the indication for which it has such designation, the drug is entitled to a period of marketing exclusivity, which precludes the FDA from approving another marketing application for the same drug and indication for that time period, except in limited circumstances. The applicable period is seven years in the United States. In the European Union, the European Commission grants orphan designation after receiving the opinion of the EMA Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products on an orphan designation application. Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000, as implemented by Regulation (EC) No. 847/2000 provides that a medicinal 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 life-threatening or chronically debilitating conditions; (2) either (a) such conditions affect not more than 5 in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product without the benefits derived from orphan status, would not generate sufficient return in the EU to justify the necessary investment in developing the medicinal product; and (3) there exists no satisfactory authorized method of diagnosis, prevention, or treatment of the condition that has been authorized in the EU, or even if such method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by that condition. Orphan medicinal product designation entitles an applicant to incentives such as fee reductions or fee waivers, protocol assistance, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. The period of market exclusivity is ten years during which the EMA cannot accept another marketing authorization application or accept an application to extend for a similar product and the European Commission cannot grant a marketing authorization for the same indication for a period of ten years. The period of market exclusivity may be extended by two years for orphan medicinal products that have also complied with an agreed Pediatric Investigation Plan. No extension to any supplementary protection certificate can be granted on the basis of pediatric studies for orphan indications. The period of market exclusivity 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 on the basis of which it received orphan medicinal product designation, including where it can be demonstrated on the basis of available evidence that the original orphan medicinal product is sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity or where the prevalence of the condition has increased above the threshold. Additionally, a marketing authorization may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. Even if we receive Orphan Drug designation for any of our product candidates, there is no guarantee that we will obtain approval or Orphan Drug exclusivity for such product candidates. Even if we obtain Orphan Drug exclusivity for any of our product candidates, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product candidates from 53 competition because different therapies can be approved for the same condition and the same therapy could be approved for different conditions. Even after an Orphan Drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care. Moreover, Orphan Drug exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be lost if the FDA later determines that the request for designation was materially defective or if the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient quantity of the drug to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. Similarly, in the EU a marketing authorization may be granted to a similar medicinal product with the same orphan indication during the 10 year period if: (i) if the applicant consents to a second original orphan medicinal product application, (ii) if the manufacturer of the original orphan medicinal product is unable to supply sufficient quantities; or (iii) if the second applicant can establish that its product, although similar, is safer, more effective or otherwise clinically superior to the original orphan medicinal product. Orphan Drug designation neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties We rely on third parties to perform the chemistry work associated with our drug discovery and preclinical activities and to conduct our preclinical studies and future clinical trials, and our business could be substantially harmed if these third parties cease performing services or perform in an unsatisfactory manner. We do not have any laboratory facilities and have relied on CROs to perform most of the medicinal chemistry work associated with our drug discovery activities. We also do not currently have the ability to independently conduct preclinical studies or clinical trials without outside assistance. We have relied on CROs to conduct all of our preclinical studies to date and intends to conduct our future clinical trials by leveraging expertise and assistance from CROs as appropriate. We plan to rely upon medical institutions, clinical investigators, contract laboratories and other third parties, such as CROs, to conduct or assist us in conducting GCP-compliant clinical trials on our product candidates properly and on time, and may not currently have all of the necessary contractual relationships in place to do so. Once we have established contractual relationships with such third-party CROs, we will have only limited control over their actual performance of these activities. We and our CROs and other vendors are required to comply with cGMP, GCP, and good laboratory practice (“GLP”), which are regulations and guidelines enforced by the FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States and any comparable foreign regulatory authorities for all of our product candidates in preclinical and clinical development. Regulatory authorities enforce these regulations through periodic inspections of trial sponsors, principal investigators, clinical trial sites and other contractors. Although we will rely on CROs to conduct any current or planned GLP-compliant preclinical studies and GCP-compliant clinical trials and has limited influence over their actual performance, we remain responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies and clinical trials is conducted in accordance with our investigational plan and protocol and applicable laws and regulations, and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities. If we or any of our CROs or vendors fail to comply with applicable regulations, the data generated in our preclinical studies and clinical trials may be deemed unreliable and the FDA, the EMA and the European Commission, MHRA, NMPA or any other comparable foreign regulatory authority may require us to perform additional preclinical studies and clinical trials before approving our marketing applications. We cannot assure you that upon inspection by a given regulatory authority, such regulatory authority will determine that all of our clinical trials comply with GCP regulations. In addition, our clinical trials must be conducted with products produced under cGMP requirements. We, our contract manufacturers, any future collaborators and their contract manufacturers could be subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States, the MHRA, the NMPA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities, to monitor and ensure compliance with cGMP. Despite our efforts to audit and verify regulatory compliance, one or more of our third-party manufacturing vendors may be found on regulatory inspection by the FDA, the competent authorities of EU Member States, the MHRA, the NMPA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to be noncompliant with cGMP regulations. This may result in shutdown of the third-party vendor or invalidation of drug product lots or processes. In some cases, a product recall may be warranted or required, which would materially affect our ability to supply and market our drug products. Our failure to comply with these requirements may require us to repeat clinical trials, which would delay the regulatory approval process. While we or our CROs have or will have agreements governing their activities, we will not be able to control whether or not they devote sufficient time and resources to our future chemistry work and preclinical and clinical 54 programs. These CROs may also have relationships with other commercial entities, including our competitors, for whom they may also be conducting clinical trials or other chemistry or drug discovery or development activities. We face the risk of potential unauthorized disclosure, infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our intellectual property by CROs, which may reduce our trade secret protection and allow our potential competitors, and other third parties, to access and exploit our proprietary technology. CROs also may use our proprietary information and intellectual property in such a way as to invite litigation or other intellectual property-related proceedings that could jeopardize or invalidate our proprietary information and intellectual property. If our CROs do not successfully carry out their contractual duties or obligations, fail to meet expected deadlines or if the quality or accuracy of the clinical data they obtain is compromised due to the failure to adhere to our clinical protocols or regulatory requirements or for any other reason, our clinical trials or other drug discovery or development activities may be extended, delayed or terminated, the clinical data generated in our clinical trials may be deemed unreliable, and we may not be able to obtain regulatory approval for, or successfully commercialize any product candidate that we develop. As a result, our financial results and the commercial prospects for any product candidate that we develop would be harmed, our costs could increase, and our ability to generate revenue could be delayed. If our relationships with our CROs were to terminate, we might not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative CROs or do so on commercially reasonable terms. Switching or adding additional CROs involves substantial cost and requires management time and focus, and could delay the discovery, development and commercialization of our product candidates. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new CRO commences work. As a result, delays occur, which can negatively impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development timelines. Though we intend to carefully manage our relationships with our CROs, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have a negative impact on our business and financial condition. We do not have our own manufacturing capabilities and will rely on third parties to produce clinical and commercial supplies of taletrectinib, safusidenib, and our other current and future product candidates. We have limited experience in drug formulation and manufacturing and do not own or operate, and we do not expect to own or operate, facilities for drug manufacturing, storage, distribution or testing. We obtain taletrectinib active pharmaceutical ingredients (“APIs”) and drug product pursuant to long-term supply agreements. We currently rely upon a single source for taletrectinib API and are working to develop a second source. To date, we have obtained APIs and drug product for our investigational products mostly from single-source third-party CMOs. We are in the process of developing our supply chain for each of our investigational products and intend to put in place framework agreements under which CMOs will generally provide us with necessary quantities of API and drug product on a project-by-project basis based on our development needs. We seek to use a different CMO for each investigational product and will consider further diversification of drug product and supply organizations as circumstances warrant. Third-party CMOs may be unable or unwilling to supply us with sufficient clinical and commercial grade quantities of our clinical materials due to production shortages or other supply interruptions resulting from health epidemics, because they are purchased by one of our competitors or another company that decides not to continue supplying us with these materials, or for other reasons. If one or more of these events occur and we are unable to timely establish an alternate supply from one or more third-party CMOs, we could experience delays in our development efforts as we locate and qualify new manufacturers. Under such circumstances, we may be required to receive drug substance for use on a purchase order basis, and as such, there can be no assurance that we actually receive sufficient quantities. See also the risk factor titled “—Our business, operations and clinical development plans and timelines and supply chain could be adversely affected by the effects of health epidemics, on the manufacturing, clinical trial and other business activities performed by us or by third parties with whom we conduct business, including our CMOs, CROs, shippers and others.” Further, our reliance on third-party manufacturers exposes us to risks beyond our control, including the risk of: • inability to meet our product specifications and quality requirements consistently; • delay or inability to procure or expand sufficient manufacturing capacity; • manufacturing and quality issues, including related to scale-up of manufacturing; • costs and validation of new equipment and facilities required for additional scale-up; • failure of the manufacturer to comply with cGMP and similar foreign standards; 55 • inability to negotiate manufacturing agreements with third parties on commercially reasonable terms; • termination or nonrenewal of manufacturing agreements with third parties in a manner or at a time that is costly or damaging to us; • reliance on a limited number of sources, and in some cases, single sources for components, such that if we are unable to secure a sufficient supply of these drug components, we will be unable to manufacture and sell our product candidates in a timely fashion, in sufficient quantities or under acceptable terms; • lack of qualified backup suppliers for those components that are currently purchased from a sole or single source supplier; • operations of our third-party manufacturers or suppliers could be disrupted by conditions unrelated to our business or operations, including the bankruptcy of the manufacturer or supplier or the issuance of a FDA Form 483 notice, warning letter, or cease and desist order; • carrier disruptions or increased costs that are beyond our control; and • failure to deliver our products under specified storage conditions and in a timely manner. Some of these events could be the basis for FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authority action, including injunction, recall, seizure or total or partial suspension of production. In addition, our third-party manufacturers and suppliers are subject to FDA inspection and may be subject to inspections from comparable foreign regulatory authorities from time to time. Failure by our third-party manufacturers and suppliers to pass such inspections and otherwise satisfactorily complete the FDA approval regimen, or comparable foreign regulatory authorities' approval regimen, with respect to our product candidate may result in non-approval for our product candidates or regulatory actions such as the issuance of FDA Form 483 notices of observations, warning letters or injunctions or the loss of operating licenses. In addition, our third-party manufacturers and suppliers are subject to numerous environmental, health and safety laws and regulations, including those governing the handling, use, storage, treatment and disposal of waste products, and failure to comply with such laws and regulations could result in significant costs associated with civil or criminal fines and penalties for such third parties. Based on the severity of the regulatory action, our clinical or commercial supply of drug and packaging and other services could be interrupted or limited, which could harm our business. In addition, our CMOs are or may be engaged with other companies to supply and manufacture materials or products for such companies, which also exposes our suppliers and manufacturers to regulatory risks for the production of such materials and products. As a result, failure to meet the regulatory requirements for the production of those materials and products may also affect the regulatory clearance of a contract supplier’s or manufacturer’s facility. If the FDA or a comparable foreign regulatory authority finds these facilities unsatisfactory in compliance with applicable regulations, does not approve these facilities for the supply or manufacture of our product candidates, or if it withdraws its approval in the future, we may need to find alternative supply or manufacturing facilities, which would negatively impact our ability to develop and obtain regulatory approval of our product candidates, or to market IBTROZI or our future approved products. For later-stage clinical trials and commercialization, we will need to take steps to increase the scale of production of our product candidates, which may include transferring production to new third-party suppliers or manufacturers. In order to conduct larger or late-stage clinical trials for our product candidates and supply sufficient commercial quantities of the resulting drug product and our components, if that product candidate is approved for sale, our CMOs and suppliers will need to produce our product candidates in larger quantities, more cost effectively and, in certain cases, at higher yields than they currently achieve. These third-party contractors may not be able to successfully increase the manufacturing capacity for any such product candidates in a timely or cost-effective manner or at all. Significant scale up of manufacturing may require additional processes, technologies and validation studies, which are costly, may not be successful and which the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities must review and approve. In addition, quality issues may arise during those scale-up activities because of the inherent properties of a product candidate itself or of a product candidate in combination with other components added during the manufacturing and packaging process, or during shipping and storage of the APIs or the finished product. If our third-party CMOs are unable to successfully scale up the manufacture of any of our product candidates in sufficient quality and quantity and at commercially reasonable prices, and we are unable to find one or more replacement suppliers or manufacturers capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost in substantially equivalent volumes and quality, and we are unable to successfully transfer the processes on a timely basis, the development of that product candidate 56 and regulatory approval or commercial launch for any resulting products may be delayed, or there may be a shortage in supply, either of which could significantly harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Failure to maintain the License Agreement between Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited and AnHeart Therapeutics Inc., dated December 7, 2018, as amended (the “Taletrectinib In-License Agreement”) and the License Agreement between Daiichi Sankyo Company, Limited and AnHeart Therapeutics Inc., dated September 7, 2020 (the “Safusidenib In-License Agreement”) could negatively impact our business. Pursuant to the terms of the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement and the Safusidenib In-License Agreement, we received certain exclusive licenses to develop, manufacture and commercialize taletrectinib and safusidenib, respectively. Consequently, our ability to develop and commercialize taletrectinib and safusidenib depends on our ability to maintain these agreements with Daiichi Sankyo. We are subject to a number of other risks associated with our dependence on the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement and the Safusidenib In-License Agreement, including: • Our obligations to make certain milestone and royalty payments; • Our obligation to use commercially reasonable efforts to perform certain development and commercialization activities and to achieve certain milestones; • Certain obligations not to develop or commercialize products that compete with taletrectinib or safusidenib; and • Potential disputes between us and Daiichi Sankyo, including disagreements regarding the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement and the Safusidenib In-License Agreement. If either the Taletrectinib In-License Agreement or the Safusidenib In-License Agreement is terminated early, we may be unable to pursue continued development, manufacture and commercialization of taletrectinib or safusidenib. If we are not able to establish and maintain collaborations, we may have to alter some of our future development and commercialization plans. Our product development programs and the commercialization of our product candidates will require substantial additional capital to fund expenses. The commercial rights to taletrectinib have been out-licensed in China, Japan, Europe and other territories, and we may enter into other collaboration agreements with pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for the future development and potential commercialization of our product candidates. We will likely have limited control over the amount and timing of resources that our current and future collaborators dedicate to the development or commercialization of any product candidates we may seek to develop and commercialize with them. We cannot predict the success of any current or future collaboration that we may enter into. We face significant competition in seeking appropriate collaborators, and a number of more established companies may also be pursuing strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, financial resources and greater clinical development and commercialization experience and capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include the design or results of clinical trials, the likelihood of approval by the FDA, European Commission, MHRA, NMPA or other similar foreign regulatory authorities, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, competing products, the existence of uncertainty with respect to our ownership of technology, which can exist if there is a challenge to such ownership without regard to the merits of the challenge, and industry and market conditions generally. The collaborator may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us for our product candidate. We may also be restricted under future license agreements from entering into agreements on certain terms with potential collaborators. Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. 57 We may not be able to negotiate collaboration agreements on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. Even if we are able to obtain a license to intellectual property of interest, we may not be able to secure exclusive rights, in which case others could use the same rights and compete with us. Our collaboration partners, if any, may not prioritize our product candidates or otherwise not effectively pursue the development of our product candidates which may delay, reduce or terminate the development of such product candidate, reduce or delay its development program or delay its potential commercialization. Further if we are unable to successfully obtain rights to required third-party intellectual property rights or maintain and protect the existing intellectual property rights we have, we may have to delay, reduce or terminate the development of our product candidates, reduce or delay its development program or one or more of our other development programs, delay its potential commercialization or reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities or increase our expenditures and undertake development or commercialization activities at our own expense. Doing so will likely harm our ability to execute our business plans. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all. If we do not have sufficient funds, we may not be able to further develop our product candidates or bring them to market and generate product revenue. Risks Related to Regulatory Compliance Health reform measures, including enacted and future legislation may increase the difficulty and cost for us to obtain marketing approval of and commercialize our product candidates and affect the prices we may charge for such product candidates. The U.S. and many foreign jurisdictions have enacted or proposed legislative and regulatory changes affecting the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of our product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities and affect our ability to profitably sell any product for which we obtain marketing approval. The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act of 2010, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010 (collectively, the “Affordable Care Act”), includes measures that have significantly changed the way healthcare is financed by both governmental and private insurers. There have been judicial, executive and congressional challenges and amendments to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act . For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (“OBBBA”), was signed into law, which narrowed access to Affordable Care Act marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the Affordable Care Act enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired Affordable Care Act subsidies. It is unclear how any such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the second Trump administration will impact the Affordable Care Act and our business. In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. For example, on August 2, 2011, the Budget Control Act of 2011, among other things, included aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of 2% per fiscal year, which began in 2013 and will remain in effect through 2032 unless additional congressional action is taken. Recently, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the U.S. with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. presidential executive orders, congressional inquiries and legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to drug pricing, reduce the cost of prescription drugs under Medicare, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs and reform government program reimbursement methodologies for drugs. We are unable to predict the future course of federal or state healthcare legislation in the U.S. directed at broadening the availability of healthcare and containing or lowering the cost of healthcare, particularly in light of the recent U.S. Presidential and Congressional elections. The current Trump administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services (“CMS”) and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced the agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturer to offer, through a direct to consumer platform, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with 58 additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions for example include (1) directing agencies to reduce workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (3) imposing tariffs of imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare Plan," to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could, among others, impact the drug approval process and modify the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, expand the orphan drug exclusion, and reduce Medicaid enrollment and funding. We expect additional health reform measures may be implemented in the future, particularly given the recent change in administration. These and any further changes in the law or regulatory framework that reduce our revenue or increase our costs could also have a material and adverse effect on our business, financial condition and results of operations. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical and biological 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 the healthcare reform measures that have been adopted and may be adopted in the future, may result in more rigorous coverage criteria and in additional downward pressure on the price that we receive for any approved product and could seriously harm our future revenues. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare or other government programs may result in a similar reduction in payments from private payors. The implementation of cost containment measures or other healthcare reforms may prevent us from being able to generate revenue, attain profitability or commercialize our products. The policies of the FDA and other regulatory authorities may change and additional government regulations may be enacted that could prevent or delay regulatory approval of our product candidates or further restrict or regulate post-approval activities. For instance, the regulatory landscape related to clinical trials in the EU recently evolved. The EU Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR), which was adopted in April 2014 and repeals the EU Clinical Trials Directive, became applicable on January 31, 2022. The CTR introduces, among other changes, a centralized application system, coordinated review procedures, expanded reporting and increased transparency obligations. Compliance with the CTR requirements by us and our third-party service providers, such as CROs, may impact our development plans. Following a public consultation that began in 2022, the United Kingdom government has enacted new legislation to overhaul the clinical trials regulatory framework. In April 2025, the UK adopted an amendment to the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004 intended to support a more streamlined and flexible regulation of clinical trials, remove unnecessary administrative burdens on trial sponsors, and protect the interests of trial participants. It also intends to bring the UK regulatory framework for clinical trials into closer alignment with the CTR. The amendment will become applicable on April 28, 2026 following a one-year transition period. While these changes introduce efficiencies and align with some principles of the EU's Clinical Trials Regulation (CTR), divergence between the United Kingdom and EU regulatory systems remains. Any significant divergence could affect the cost and complexity of conducting clinical trials in the United Kingdom and may impact the acceptability of United Kingdom-based trial data for seeking marketing authorizations in the EU, and vice versa. In addition, on December 11, 2025, the European Commission, the Parliament and the European Council reached a political agreement on a comprehensive overhaul of EU pharmaceutical legislation (the “Pharma Package”). The reform has been under negotiation since the European Commission submitted its proposal in April 2023. This package - comprised of a new directive and regulation to replace existing legislation – aims to modernize the EU framework. The political agreement is still subject to formal approval by the European Parliament and Council. If approved in the form proposed, the Pharma Package will, among other changes, reduce the baseline market protection 59 period by one year, with limited opportunities for extensions, capped at a maximum of eleven years; reshape the incentives regime for orphan medicinal products, by introducing “breakthrough” orphan medicinal products – those addressing diseases with no available medicinal treatment – which will benefit from 11 years of market exclusivity; and expand the Bolar exemption to permit generic and biosimilar manufacturers to conduct preparatory activities for regulatory submissions, including pricing and reimbursement, and participate in procurement tenders while patent protection remains in force. A decrease in market exclusivity opportunities for our product candidates in the EU, combined with the expanded Bolar exemption, could open them to generic or biosimilar competition earlier than under the current regime, potentially impacting reimbursement status and the commercial prospects of our product candidates. Our business operations and current and future relationships with investigators, healthcare professionals, consultants, third-party payors and customers are subject, directly or indirectly, to federal and state healthcare fraud and abuse laws, false claims laws, transparency laws, health information privacy and security laws and other healthcare laws and regulations, including comparable foreign healthcare laws and regulations. If we are unable to comply, or have not fully complied, with such laws, we could face substantial penalties. Our current and future operations are subject to various U.S. federal and state healthcare laws and regulations. Healthcare providers and others play a primary role in the recommendation and prescription of any products for which we obtain marketing approval. These laws may impact, among other things, our current business operations, including commercialization of IBTROZI, our clinical research activities, and proposed sales, marketing and education programs and constrain the business of financial arrangements and relationships with healthcare providers and other parties through which we may market, sell and distribute our products for which we obtain marketing approval. The laws that may affect our ability to operate include: • the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute, which prohibits, among other things, persons or entities from knowingly and willfully soliciting, offering, receiving or paying any remuneration (including any kickback, bribe or certain rebates), directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or reward either the referral of an individual for, or the purchase, lease, order or recommendation of, any good, facility, item or service, for which payment may be made, in whole or in part, under U.S. federal and state healthcare programs such as Medicare and Medicaid. A person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation; • the U.S. federal false claims, including the False Claims Act, which can be enforced through whistleblower actions, and Civil Monetary Penalties Laws, which, among other things, impose criminal and civil penalties against individuals or entities for knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, to the U.S. federal government, claims for payment or approval that are false or fraudulent, knowingly making, using or causing to be made or used, a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim, or from knowingly making a false statement to avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the U.S. federal government. In addition, the government may assert that a claim including items and services resulting from a violation of the U.S. federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the False Claims Act; • the U.S. federal Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act of 1996, (“HIPAA”), which imposes criminal and civil liability for, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program, or knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up a material fact or making any materially false statement, in connection with the delivery of, or payment for, healthcare benefits, items or services; similar to the U.S. 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, (“HITECH”), and its implementing regulations, which imposes certain obligations, including mandatory contractual terms, with respect to safeguarding the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information without appropriate authorization by “covered entities”, i.e. health plans, healthcare clearinghouses and certain healthcare providers, as well as their “business associates” and covered subcontractors that perform certain services for or on their behalf involving the use or disclosure of individually identifiable health information; 60 • the U.S. Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, which prohibits, among other things, the adulteration or misbranding of drugs, biologics and medical devices; • the U.S. federal legislation commonly referred to as Physician Payments Sunshine Act, enacted as part of the Affordable Care Act, and its implementing regulations, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies that are reimbursable under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program to report annually to CMS information related to certain payments and other transfers of value to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain other healthcare professionals (such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners), and teaching hospitals, as well as ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members; • analogous state laws and regulations, including: state anti-kickback and false claims laws, which may apply to our business practices, including, but not limited to, research, distribution, sales and marketing arrangements and claims involving healthcare items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including private insurers; state laws that require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance guidance promulgated by the U.S. federal government, or otherwise restrict payments that may be made to healthcare providers and other potential referral sources; state laws and regulations that require drug manufacturers to file reports relating to pricing and marketing information, which requires tracking gifts and other remuneration and items of value provided to healthcare professionals and entities; state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales representatives; and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; and • European and other foreign law equivalents of each of the laws, including reporting requirements detailing interactions with and payments to healthcare providers. In addition, some state laws require pharmaceutical companies to comply with the pharmaceutical industry’s voluntary compliance guidelines and the relevant compliance regulations promulgated by the federal government and may require drug manufacturers to report information related to payments and other transfers of value to physicians and other healthcare providers or marketing expenditures. State and non-U.S. laws also govern the privacy and security of health information in some circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. Ensuring that our internal operations and future business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations will involve substantial costs. It is possible that governmental authorities will conclude that our business practices do not comply with current or future statutes, regulations, agency guidance or case law involving applicable fraud and abuse or other healthcare laws and regulations. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the laws described above or any other governmental laws and regulations that may apply to us, we may be subject to significant penalties, including civil, criminal and administrative penalties, damages, fines, exclusion from U.S. government funded healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, or similar programs in other countries or jurisdictions, disgorgement, imprisonment, contractual damages, reputational harm, diminished profits, additional reporting requirements and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or similar agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws and the delay, reduction, termination or restructuring of our operations. Further, defending against any such actions can be costly and time-consuming, and may require significant financial and personnel resources. Therefore, even if we are successful in defending against any such actions that may be brought against us, our business may be impaired. If any of the physicians or other providers or entities with whom we expect to do business is found to not be in compliance with applicable laws, they may be subject to significant criminal, civil or administrative sanctions, including exclusions from government funded healthcare programs and imprisonment. If any of the above occur, it could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. We and the third parties with whom we work are subject to stringent and evolving U.S. and foreign laws, regulations, and rules, contractual obligations, industry standards, policies and other obligations related to data privacy and security. Our (or the third parties with whom we work) actual or perceived failure to comply with such obligations could lead to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation (including class claims) and mass 61 arbitration demands; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; loss of revenue or profits; and other adverse business consequences. In the ordinary course of business, we collect, receive, store, process, generate, use, transfer, disclose, make accessible, protect, secure, dispose of, transmit, and share (collectively, process) personal data and other sensitive information, including proprietary and confidential business information, trade secrets, intellectual property, information we collect about trial participants in connection with clinical trials, and sensitive third-party information (collectively, sensitive data). Our processing activities subject us to numerous data privacy and security obligations, such as various laws, regulations, guidance, industry standards, external and internal privacy and security policies, contractual requirements and other obligations relating to data privacy and security. In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). For example, HIPAA, as amended by HITECH, imposes specific requirements relating to the privacy, security, and transmission of individually identifiable protected health information. Numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services to the extent we become subject to these laws in the future. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA, applies to personal data of California residents and requires businesses subject to the CCPA to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and respond to requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. Similar laws are being considered in other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more laws related to personal data to become effective in the future. These developments may further complicate compliance efforts and increase our legal risk and compliance costs. Outside the United States, an increasing number of laws, regulations, and industry standards may govern data privacy and security. For example, the European Union’s General Data Protection Regulation, or EU GDPR, the United Kingdom’s GDPR, or UK GDPR, Australia’s Privacy Act, and China’s Personal Information Protection Law, or PIPL, impose strict requirements for processing personal data. For example, under GDPR, companies may face private litigation related to processing of personal data brought by classes of data subjects or consumer protection organizations authorized at law to represent their interests, temporary or definitive prohibitions on data processing and other corrective actions, or fines of up to the greater of 20 million Euros under the EU GDPR / 17.5 million pounds under the UK GDPR, or 4% of their worldwide annual revenue, whichever is higher. In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the European Economic Area, or EEA, and the UK have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions may adopt similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA’s standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, 62 and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activist groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers of personal data out of Europe for allegedly violating the EU GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. Additionally, the U.S. Department of Justice issued a rule entitled the Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons, which places additional restriction on certain data transactions involving countries of concern (e.g., China) and covered persons (i.e., individuals and who are designated as such by the U.S. Attorney General or considered “foreign persons” and are majority owned by, organized under the laws of, a primary resident in, or a contractor of, a covered person or country of concern, as applicable) that may impact certain business activities such as vendor engagements, sale or sharing of data, employment of certain individuals, and investor agreements. Violations of the rule could lead to significant civil and criminal fines and penalties. The rule applies regardless of whether data is anonymized, key-coded, pseudonymized, de-identified or encrypted, which presents particular challenges for companies like ours and may impact our ability to transfer data in connection with certain transactions or agreements. We also publish privacy policies, marketing materials, and other statements, regarding data privacy and security. If these policies, materials, or statements are found to be deficient, lacking in transparency, deceptive, unfair, or misrepresentative of our practices, we may be subject to investigation, enforcement actions by regulators, or other adverse consequences. Obligations related to data privacy and security (and individuals’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which may be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources and may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf. We may at times fail (or be perceived to have failed) in our efforts to comply with our data privacy and security obligations. Moreover, despite our efforts, our personnel or third parties with whom we work (such as contract research organizations and clinical trial sites) may fail (or be perceived to have failed) to comply with such obligations, which could negatively impact our business operations. If we or the third parties with whom we work fail, or are perceived to have failed, to address or comply with applicable data privacy and security obligations, we could face significant consequences, including but not limited to, government enforcement actions (e.g., investigations, fines, penalties, audits, inspections, and similar); litigation (including class-action claims) and mass arbitration demands; additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; bans or restrictions on processing personal data (including clinical trial data); orders to destroy or not use personal data; and imprisonment of company officials. In particular, plaintiffs have become increasingly more active in bringing privacy-related claims against companies, including class claims and mass arbitration demands. Some of these claims allow for the recovery of statutory damages on a per violation basis, and, if viable, carry the potential for monumental statutory damages, depending on the volume of data and the number of violations. Any of these events could have a material adverse effect on our reputation, business, or financial condition, including but not limited to: interruptions or stoppages in our business operations (including, as relevant, clinical trials); inability to process sensitive data or to operate in certain jurisdictions; limited ability to develop or commercialize our products; expenditure of time and resources to defend any claim or inquiry; adverse publicity; or substantial changes to our business model or operations. Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property If we are unable to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce sufficient patent and other intellectual property rights for our product candidates and technology, or if the scope of patent and other intellectual property rights obtained is not sufficiently broad, we may not be able to compete effectively in our market. Our success depends in significant part on our ability and the ability of any licensors and collaborators to obtain, maintain, protect and enforce patents and other intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates and technology and to operate our business without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property rights of others. 63 The patent prosecution process is uncertain, expensive and time-consuming. We and our current or future licensors, licensees or collaborators may not be able to prepare, file and prosecute all necessary or desirable patent applications at a reasonable cost or in a timely manner. It is also possible that we or our future licensors will fail to identify patentable aspects of our research and development output in time to obtain patent protection or fail to file patent applications covering inventions made in the course of development and commercialization activities before a competitor or another third party files a patent application covering, or publishes information disclosing, a same or similar, independently-developed invention. Such competitor’s or other third party’s patent application or published information may pose obstacles to or prohibit our ability to obtain patent protection or limit the scope of the patent protection we may obtain. Although we enter into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to confidential or patentable aspects of our research and development output, such as our employees, collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose such output before a patent application is filed, thereby jeopardizing our ability to seek patent protection in certain jurisdictions. In addition, publications of discoveries in the scientific literature often lag behind actual discoveries, and patent applications in the U.S. and other jurisdictions are typically not published until approximately 18 months after filing, or in some cases not at all. Therefore, we cannot be certain that we or our future licensors were the first to conceive the inventions claimed in our owned or licensed patents or pending patent applications, or were the first to file for patent protection of such inventions. The patent position of biotechnology and pharmaceutical companies generally is uncertain, involves complex legal and factual questions and is the subject of much litigation. As a result, the issuance, scope, validity, enforceability and commercial value of our and our current or future licensors’ patent rights are uncertain. Our and our licensors’ pending and future patent applications may not mature into patents or result in issued patents that protect our technology or product candidates, in whole or in part, or effectively exclude others from commercializing competitive technologies and product candidates. The patent examination process may require us or our licensors to narrow the scope of the claims of our pending and future patent applications, and therefore, even if such patent applications issue as patents, they may not issue in a form that will provide us with any meaningful protection, prevent competitors or other third parties from competing with us or otherwise provide us with any competitive advantage. Our and our licensors’ patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications, and then only to the extent the issued claims cover such technology. Any patents that we hold or in-license may be challenged or, circumvented by third parties or narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable in litigation or post-grant proceedings. Consequently, we do not know whether any of our product candidates will be protectable or remain protected by valid and enforceable patents. Our competitors or other third parties may be able to circumvent our patents by developing similar or alternative technologies or products in a non-infringing manner. Any of the foregoing could harm our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. The patent protection we obtain for our product candidates and technology may be challenged or not sufficient to provide us with any competitive advantage. Even if our owned or licensed patent applications issue as patents, the issuance of any such patents is not conclusive as to their inventorship, scope, validity or enforceability, and such patents may be challenged, invalidated, narrowed or held to be unenforceable, including in the courts or patent offices in the U.S. and abroad, or circumvented. We may be subject to a third-party preissuance submission of prior art to the USPTO, a federal court or equivalent foreign bodies, or become involved in opposition, derivation, revocation, re-examination, post-grant and inter partes review or interference proceedings, or other similar proceedings, challenging our patent rights or the patent rights of others. An adverse determination as a result of any such submission, proceeding or litigation could reduce the scope of, invalidate, or render unenforceable, our patent rights, allow third parties to commercialize our technology or products and compete directly with us, without payment to us, or result in our inability to manufacture or commercialize products without infringing third-party patent rights. Moreover, we, or one of our licensors, may have to participate in interference or derivation proceedings declared by the USPTO to determine priority or ownership of invention or in post-grant challenge proceedings, such as oppositions in a foreign patent office, that challenge priority of invention or other features of patentability. Such proceedings and any other patent challenges may result in loss of patent rights, loss of exclusivity, loss of priority or in patent claims being narrowed, invalidated or held unenforceable, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technology and product candidates. Such proceedings also may result in substantial cost and require significant time from our scientists and management, even if the eventual outcome is favorable to us. Moreover, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other 64 developments related to any of the foregoing proceedings. If securities analysts or investors perceive those results to be negative, it could cause the price of shares of our Common Stock to decline. Any of the foregoing could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Moreover, some of our owned or in-licensed patents and patent applications may in the future be co-owned with third parties. If we are unable to obtain an exclusive license to any such co-owners’ interest in such patents or patent applications, such co-owners may be able to license their rights to other third parties, including our competitors, who could market competing products and technology. In addition, we may need the cooperation of any such co-owners in order to enforce such patents against third parties, and such cooperation may not be provided to us. Our reliance on third parties requires us to share our trade secrets, which increases the possibility that a competitor will discover them or that our trade secrets will be misappropriated or disclosed. Because we rely on third parties to discover, develop and manufacture our product candidates, we must, at times, share certain of our trade secrets with them. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into agreements containing confidentiality provisions, including if applicable, confidentiality agreements, material transfer agreements, collaborative research agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our collaborators, advisors, employees and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information, such as trade secrets. Despite these agreements with third parties, sharing trade secrets and other confidential information increases the risk that such trade secrets become known by our competitors, are inadvertently incorporated into the technology of others or are disclosed or used in violation of these agreements. Given that our proprietary position is based, in part, on our know-how and trade secrets, a competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets or other unauthorized use or disclosure could impair our competitive position and may harm our business. In addition, these agreements typically restrict the ability of our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants to publish data potentially relating to our trade secrets, although our agreements may contain certain limited publication rights. Despite our efforts to protect our trade secrets, our competitors may discover our trade secrets, either through breach of our agreements with third parties, independent development or publication of information by any of our third-party collaborators. A competitor’s discovery of our trade secrets could impair our competitive position and have an adverse impact on our business. We may become involved in lawsuits to protect or enforce our patents or other intellectual property, which could be expensive, time-consuming and unsuccessful, and issued patents covering our technology and product candidates could be found invalid or unenforceable if challenged. Competitors and other third parties may infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate our issued patents or other intellectual property or the patents or other intellectual property of our licensors. In addition, our patents or the patents of our licensors may become involved in inventorship or priority disputes. Our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technology claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. To counter infringement or other unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time-consuming. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents or that our patents are invalid and/or unenforceable. In a patent infringement proceeding, a court may decide that a patent of ours is invalid and/or unenforceable, in whole or in part, construe the patent’s claims narrowly or refuse to stop the other party from using the technology at issue on the grounds that our patents do not cover the technology. An adverse result in any litigation proceeding could put one or more of our owned or licensed patents at risk of being invalidated and/or held unenforceable, interpreted narrowly or interpreted in a manner that would not prevent competitors from entering the market. Further, we may find it impractical or undesirable to enforce our intellectual property against some third parties. In patent litigation in the U.S., defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including, e.g., lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or insufficient written description. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or made a misleading statement during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar claims before the USPTO or an equivalent foreign body, even outside the context of litigation. Potential proceedings include re-examination, post-grant review, inter partes review, interference 65 proceedings, derivation proceedings and equivalent proceedings in foreign jurisdictions (e.g., opposition proceedings). Such proceedings could result in the revocation of, cancellation of, or amendment to our patents in such a way that they no longer cover our technology or any product candidates that we may develop. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. With respect to the validity question, for example, we cannot be certain that there is no invalidating prior art of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity and/or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of the patent protection on the applicable product candidates or technology covered by the patent rendered invalid and/or unenforceable. Such a loss of patent protection could materially harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Interference or derivation proceedings provoked by third parties or brought by us or declared by the USPTO may be necessary to determine the ownership or priority of inventions with respect to our patents or patent applications. An unfavorable outcome could require us to cease using the related technology or to attempt to license rights to it from the prevailing party. Such licenses may not be available on commercially reasonable terms, or at all, or may be non-exclusive. If we are unable to obtain and maintain such licenses, we may need to cease the development, manufacture and commercialization of one or more of the product candidates we may develop. In addition, if we or our licensors are unsuccessful in any inventorship disputes to which we or they are subject, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights, such as exclusive ownership of, or the exclusive right to use, our owned or in-licensed patents. The loss of exclusivity or the narrowing of scope of our owned and/or licensed patents could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar or identical technology and products. Any of the foregoing could result in a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations or prospects. Even if we are successful in any of the foregoing disputes, it could result in substantial costs and be a distraction to management and other employees. Furthermore, because of the substantial amount of discovery required in connection with intellectual property litigation, there is a risk that some of our confidential information could be compromised by disclosure during this type of litigation or proceeding. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Most of our competitors are larger than we are and have substantially greater resources. They are, therefore, more likely to be able to sustain the costs of complex patent litigation or proceedings than we can because of their greater financial resources and more mature and developed intellectual property portfolios. Accordingly, despite our efforts, we may not be able to prevent third parties from infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating our intellectual property. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims could result in substantial costs and diversion of management resources, which could harm our business. In addition, the uncertainties associated with litigation could compromise our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our internal research programs or in-license needed technology or other product candidates. There could also be public announcements of the results of the hearing, motions or other interim proceedings or developments. If securities analysts or investors perceive those results to be negative, it could cause the price of shares of our Common Stock to decline. Any of the foregoing events could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may not be able to protect our intellectual property rights throughout the world. Filing, prosecuting, maintaining, defending and enforcing patents and other intellectual property rights on our product candidates in all countries throughout the world would be prohibitively expensive, and our intellectual property rights in some countries outside the U.S. can be less extensive than those in the U.S. As such, we may choose not to seek to protect our intellectual property in certain jurisdictions, which could leave us without recourse to prevent competitive products from being manufactured or commercialized in such jurisdictions. In addition, the laws of some foreign countries do not protect intellectual property rights to the same extent as federal and state laws in the U.S.. Consequently, we may not be able to prevent third parties from practicing our inventions in all countries or from selling or importing products made using our inventions in all jurisdictions. Competitors may use our technologies in jurisdictions where we have not obtained patent protection or other intellectual property rights to develop their own products and may export otherwise infringing, misappropriating or violating products to territories where we have patent or other intellectual property protection, but enforcement rights are not as strong as those in the U.S.. These products may compete with our product candidates, and our patents or other intellectual property rights may not be effective or sufficient to prevent them from competing. 66 Many companies have encountered significant problems in protecting and defending intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions. The legal systems of some countries do not favor the enforcement of patents and other intellectual property rights, which could make it difficult for us to stop the infringement, misappropriation or other violation of our intellectual property rights generally. Proceedings to enforce our intellectual property rights in foreign jurisdictions could result in substantial costs and divert our efforts and attention from other aspects of our business, could put our patents at risk of being invalidated or interpreted narrowly and our patent applications at risk of not issuing and could provoke third parties to assert claims against us. We may not prevail in any lawsuits that we initiate, and the damages or other remedies awarded, if any, may not be commercially meaningful. Many countries, including European Union countries, India, Japan and China, have compulsory licensing laws under which a patent owner may be compelled under specified circumstances to grant licenses to third parties. In addition, many countries limit the enforceability of patents against government agencies or government contractors. In those countries, we may have limited remedies if patents are infringed or if we are compelled to grant a license to a third party, which could materially diminish the value of those patents. This could limit our potential revenue opportunities. Accordingly, our efforts to enforce our intellectual property rights around the world may be inadequate to obtain a significant commercial advantage from the intellectual property that we develop or license, which could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may not identify relevant third-party patents or pending patent applications or may incorrectly interpret the relevance, scope or expiration of a third-party patent which might adversely affect our ability to develop and market our product candidates. We are developing certain product candidates in highly competitive areas and cannot guarantee that any patent searches or analyses that we may conduct, including the identification of relevant patents or pending patent applications, the scope of patent claims or the expiration of relevant patents, are complete or thorough, nor can we be certain that we have identified each and every third-party patent and pending patent application in the U.S. and abroad that is or may be relevant to or necessary for the commercialization of our product candidates in any jurisdiction. For example, U.S. patent applications filed before November 29, 2000 and certain U.S. patent applications filed after that date that will not be filed outside the U.S. remain confidential until patents issue. Patent applications in the U.S. and elsewhere are published approximately 18 months after the earliest filing for which priority is claimed, with such earliest filing date being commonly referred to as the priority date. Therefore, patents or pending patent applications covering our product candidates could have been or may be filed in the future by third parties without our knowledge. Additionally, patents and pending patent applications that have been published can, subject to certain limitations, be later amended in a manner that could cover our product candidates or the manufacturing or use of our product candidates. The scope of a patent claim is determined by an interpretation of the law, the written disclosure in a patent and the patent’s prosecution history. Our interpretation of the relevance or the scope of a patent or a pending patent application may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to market our product candidates. We may incorrectly determine that our product candidates are not covered by a third-party patent or pending patent application or may incorrectly predict whether a third party’s pending application will issue with claims of relevant scope. Our determination of the expiration date of any patent in the U.S. or abroad that we consider relevant may be incorrect, which may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our product candidates. Our failure to identify and correctly interpret relevant patents or pending patent applications may negatively impact our ability to develop and market our product candidates. If we fail to identify or correctly interpret relevant patents or pending patent applications or if we are unable to obtain licenses to relevant patents or pending patent applications, we may be subject to infringement claims. We cannot guarantee that we will be able to successfully settle or otherwise resolve such infringement claims. If we fail in any such dispute, in addition to being forced to pay damages, potentially including in the form of future royalties, which may be significant, we may be temporarily or permanently prohibited from commercializing any of our product candidates that are held to be infringing. We might, if possible, also be forced to redesign product candidates so that we no longer infringe the third-party intellectual property rights. Any of these events, even if we were ultimately to prevail, could require us to divert substantial financial and management resources that we would otherwise be able to devote to our business and could adversely affect our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If we are unable to obtain licenses from third parties on commercially reasonable terms or fail to comply with our obligations under such agreements, our business could be harmed. 67 It may be necessary for us to use the patented or other proprietary technology of third parties to commercialize our products, in which case we would be required to obtain a license or ownership from these third parties. The licensing or acquisition of third-party intellectual property rights is a competitive area, and more established companies may pursue strategies to license or acquire third-party intellectual property rights that we may consider attractive or necessary. These established companies may have a competitive advantage over us due to their size, capital resources or greater clinical development and commercialization capabilities. In addition, companies that perceive us to be a competitor may be unwilling to assign or license rights to us. If we are unable to license or acquire such intellectual property or technology, or if we are forced to in-license such intellectual property or technology on unfavorable terms, our business could be materially harmed. If we are unable to obtain a necessary license, we may be unable to develop or commercialize the affected product candidates, or the cost of development, manufacture or commercialization may be materially increased, which could materially harm our business, and the third parties owning such intellectual property rights could seek either an injunction prohibiting our sales, or, with respect to our sales, an obligation on our part to pay royalties and/or other forms of compensation. Even if we are able to obtain a license, it may be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us. If we fail to comply with our obligations under any future license agreements, such counterparties may have the right to terminate these agreements, in which event we might not be able to develop, manufacture or commercialize, or may be forced to cease developing, manufacturing or marketing, any product that is covered by these agreements or may face other penalties under such agreements. Such an occurrence could materially adversely affect the value of the product candidate being developed under any such agreement. Termination of these agreements or reduction or elimination of our rights under these agreements may result in our having to negotiate new or reinstated agreements with less favorable terms, cause us to lose our rights under these agreements, including our rights to important intellectual property or technology, or impede, delay or prohibit the further development or commercialization of one or more product candidates that rely on such agreements. If we were to lose our rights to licensed intellectual property, we may not be able to continue developing or commercializing our product candidates, if approved. If we breach any of the agreements under which we license the use, development and commercialization rights to our product candidates or technology from third parties or, in certain cases, we fail to meet certain development deadlines, we could lose license rights that are important to our business. Patent terms may be inadequate to protect our competitive position on our product candidates for an adequate amount of time. Patents have a limited lifespan. In the U.S., if all maintenance fees are timely paid, the natural expiration of a patent is generally 20 years from its earliest U.S. non-provisional filing date. Various extensions may be available, and a given patent may be subject to other term adjustments, but the life of a patent, and the protection it affords, is limited. Even if patents covering our product candidates are obtained, once the patent life has expired for a product candidate, we may be open to competition from competitive products, including generic medications. Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of new product candidates, patents protecting such product candidates might expire before or shortly after such product candidates are commercialized. As a result, our owned and licensed patent portfolio may not provide us with sufficient rights to exclude others from commercializing product candidates similar or identical to ours. Depending upon the timing, duration and conditions of any FDA marketing approval of our product candidates, one or more of our U.S. patents may be eligible for limited patent term extension under the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984, referred to as the Hatch-Waxman Amendments, and one or more of our foreign patents may be eligible for patent term extension under similar legislation, for example, in the European Union. In the U.S., the Hatch-Waxman Amendments permit a patent term extension of up to five years for a patent covering an approved product as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and the FDA regulatory review process provided other requirements are met. However, there are no assurances that the FDA, USPTO or any comparable foreign regulatory authority or national patent office will grant such extensions, in whole or in part and the length of any available extension may vary based on a number of factors. For example, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. Only one patent per approved product can be extended, the extension cannot extend the total patent term beyond 14 years from approval, and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, 68 the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for the applicable product candidate will be shortened, and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may take advantage of our investment in development and trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product earlier than might otherwise be the case, and our competitive position, business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects could be adversely affected. Changes in patent law could diminish the value of patents in general, thereby impairing our ability to protect our product candidates. Obtaining and enforcing patents in the pharmaceutical industry is inherently uncertain, due in part to ongoing changes in the patent laws. Depending on decisions by Congress, the federal courts, and the USPTO and equivalent institutions in other jurisdictions, the laws and regulations governing patents, and interpretation thereof, could change in unpredictable ways that could weaken our and our licensors’ or collaborators’ ability to obtain new patents or to enforce existing or future patents. For example, in recent years the U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases that have been interpreted to have either narrowed the scope of patent protection or weakened the rights of patent owners in certain situations. Therefore, there is increased uncertainty with regard to our and our licensors’ or collaborators’ ability to obtain patents in the future, as well as uncertainty with respect to the value of patents once obtained. Recent patent reform legislation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our and our licensors’ or collaborators’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or our licensors’ or collaborators’ issued patents. Assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, prior to March 16, 2013, in the U.S., the first to invent the claimed invention was entitled to the patent, while outside the U.S., the first to file a patent application was entitled to the patent. On March 16, 2013, under the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act enacted in September 2011 (the “Leahy-Smith Act”), the U.S. transitioned to a first inventor to file system in which, assuming that other requirements for patentability are met, the first inventor to file a patent application will be entitled to the patent on an invention regardless of whether a third party was the first to invent the claimed invention. The Leahy-Smith Act also includes a number of significant changes that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted and may also affect patent litigation. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO-administered post-grant proceedings, including post-grant review, inter partes review and derivation proceedings. The USPTO recently developed new regulations and procedures to govern administration of the Leahy-Smith Act, and many of the substantive changes to patent law associated with the Leahy-Smith Act, particularly the first inventor-to-file provisions. Accordingly, it is not clear what, if any, impact the Leahy-Smith Act will have on the operation of our business. However, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our or our licensors’ patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our or our licensors’ issued patents, all of which could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Obtaining and maintaining patent protection depends on compliance with various procedural, document submission, fee payment and other requirements imposed by governmental patent agencies, and our patent protection could be reduced or eliminated if we fail to comply with these requirements. Periodic maintenance fees, renewal fees, annuity fees and various other government fees on any issued patents and certain pending patent applications are required to be paid to the USPTO or foreign patent agencies in several stages over the lifetime of a patent. In certain circumstances, we may rely on our licensors to pay these fees. The USPTO and various foreign patent agencies also require compliance with a number of procedural, documentary, fee payment and other similar requirements during the patent application and prosecution process. Noncompliance events that could result in abandonment or lapse of a patent or patent application include failure to respond to official communications within prescribed time limits, non-payment of fees and failure to properly legalize and submit formal documents. While an inadvertent lapse can in many cases be cured by payment of a late fee or by other means in accordance with the applicable rules, there are situations in which non-compliance can result in irrevocable abandonment or lapse of the patent or patent application, resulting in partial or complete loss of patent rights in the relevant jurisdiction. If we or our licensors or collaborators fail to maintain the patents and patent applications covering our product candidates, our competitors might be able to enter the market with similar or identical products or technology, which would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. 69 Third parties may initiate legal proceedings alleging that we are infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating their intellectual property rights, the outcome of which would be uncertain and could negatively impact the success of our business. Our commercial success depends upon our ability and the ability of our collaborators to develop, manufacture, market and sell our product candidates and use our proprietary technologies without infringing, misappropriating or otherwise violating the intellectual property and other proprietary rights of third parties. There is considerable intellectual property litigation in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical industries. We may become party to, or be threatened with, future adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our product candidates and technology, including re-examination, interference, post-grant review, inter partes review or derivation proceedings, or other similar proceedings, before the USPTO, a federal court or an equivalent foreign body. Numerous U.S. and foreign issued patents and pending patent applications owned by third parties exist in the fields in which we are developing our product candidates. In the event that any of these patents were asserted against us, we believe that we would have defenses against any such action, including that such patents are invalid and/or unenforceable, that our product candidates do not infringe such patents, or that we would be able to replace such technology with alternative, non-infringing technology. However, if any such patents were to be asserted against us and our defenses to such assertion were unsuccessful and such alternative technology was not available or technologically or commercially practical, unless we obtain a license to such patents, we could be liable for damages, which could be significant and include treble damages and attorneys’ fees if we are found to willfully infringe such patents, and we could be precluded from commercializing any product candidates that were ultimately held to infringe such patents. Any potential future legal proceedings relating to these patents could cause us to incur significant expenses, and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. If we are unsuccessful in our challenges to these patents and become subject to litigation or are unable to obtain a license on commercially reasonable terms with respect to these patents, it could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. Even if we believe third-party intellectual property claims are without merit, there is no assurance that a court would find in our favor on questions of infringement, validity, enforceability or priority. A court of competent jurisdiction could hold that third-party patents asserted against us are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could materially and adversely affect our ability to commercialize any product candidates we may develop and any other product candidates or technologies covered by the asserted third-party patents. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, there is no assurance that a court of competent jurisdiction would invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. If we are found to infringe, misappropriate or otherwise violate a third party’s intellectual property rights, and we are unsuccessful in demonstrating that such rights are invalid or unenforceable, we could be required to obtain a license from such a third party in order to continue developing and marketing our products and technology. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors access to the same technologies licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease commercializing the infringing technology or product candidates. A finding of infringement could prevent us from commercializing our product candidates or force us to cease some of our business operations. In the event of a successful claim of infringement against us, we may have to pay substantial damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees for willful infringement, pay royalties and other fees, redesign our infringing drug or obtain one or more licenses from third parties, which may be impossible or require substantial time and monetary expenditure. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We may be subject to claims by third parties asserting that we or our employees have infringed upon, misappropriated or otherwise violated their intellectual property rights, or claiming ownership of what we regard as our own intellectual property. Many of our employees were previously employed at other biotechnology or pharmaceutical companies. Although we try to ensure that our employees, consultants and advisors do not use the proprietary information or know-how of others in their work for us, we may be subject to claims that we or these individuals have used or 70 disclosed intellectual property, including trade secrets or other proprietary information, of others, such as any such individual’s former employer. Litigation may be necessary to defend against these claims. In addition, we or our licensors may be subject to claims that former employees, collaborators or other third parties have an interest in our owned or in-licensed patents or other intellectual property as an inventor or co-inventor. While it is our policy to require our employees and contractors who may be involved in the development of intellectual property to execute agreements assigning such intellectual property to us, we may be unsuccessful in executing such an agreement with each party who in fact conceives, develops or reduces to practice intellectual property that we regard as our own. Our and their assignment agreements may not be self-executing or may be breached, and we may be forced to bring claims against third parties, or defend claims they may bring against us, to determine the ownership of what we regard as our intellectual property. If we fail in prosecuting or defending any such claims, in addition to paying monetary damages, we may lose valuable intellectual property rights or personnel. Even if we are successful in litigating such claims, litigation could result in substantial costs, delay development of our product candidates and be a distraction to management. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Intellectual property litigation could cause us to spend substantial resources and distract our personnel from their normal responsibilities. Even if resolved in our favor, litigation or other legal proceedings relating to intellectual property claims may cause us to incur significant expenses and could distract our technical and management personnel from their normal responsibilities. In addition, there could be public announcements of the results of hearings, motions or other interim proceedings or developments and if securities analysts or investors perceive these results to be negative, it could have a substantial adverse effect on the price of our Common Stock. Such litigation or proceedings could substantially increase our operating losses and reduce the resources available for development activities or any future sales, marketing or distribution activities. We may not have sufficient financial or other resources to conduct such litigation or proceedings adequately. Some of our competitors may be able to sustain the costs of such litigation or proceedings more effectively than we can because of their greater financial resources. Uncertainties resulting from the initiation and continuation of patent litigation or other proceedings could compromise our ability to compete in the marketplace, including compromising our ability to raise the funds necessary to continue our clinical trials, continue our research programs, license necessary technology from third parties or enter into development collaborations that would help us commercialize our product candidates, if approved. Any of the foregoing events would harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. If we are unable to protect the confidentiality of our trade secrets, our business and competitive position would be harmed. We rely on trade secrets and agreements containing confidentiality obligations to protect our unpatented know-how, technology and other proprietary information and to maintain our competitive position. With respect to our research and development programs, we consider trade secrets and know-how to be one of our important sources of intellectual property, including our extensive knowledge of certain drug delivery techniques and drug conjugation. Trade secrets and know-how can be difficult to protect. We seek to protect these trade secrets and other proprietary technology, in part, by entering into non-disclosure and confidentiality agreements with parties who have access to them, such as our employees, collaborators, CROs, contract manufacturers, consultants, advisors and other third parties. We also enter into confidentiality and invention or patent assignment agreements with our employees and consultants. We cannot guarantee that we have entered into such agreements with each party that may have or has had access to our trade secrets or proprietary technology and processes. Despite these efforts, any of these parties may breach the agreements and disclose our proprietary information, including our trade secrets, and we may not be able to obtain adequate remedies for such breaches. Enforcing a claim that a party illegally disclosed or misappropriated a trade secret is difficult, expensive and time-consuming, and the outcome is unpredictable. In addition, some courts inside and outside the U.S. are less willing or unwilling to protect trade secrets. If any of our trade secrets were to be lawfully obtained or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, we would have no right to prevent them from using that technology or information to compete with us. If any of our trade secrets were to be disclosed to or independently developed by a competitor or other third party, our competitive position would be materially and adversely harmed. 71 We may not be able to protect and enforce our trademarks and trade names, or build name recognition in our markets of interest thereby harming our competitive position. We intend to rely on both registered and common law rights for our trademarks. We have applied to register certain of our trademarks with the USPTO and trademark authorities in certain other countries and may in the future seek to register additional trademarks in the U.S. or other countries. Our current and future trademark applications may not mature to registration in a timely fashion or at all, and our registered trademarks may not be maintained or enforced. In the U.S. and some foreign jurisdictions, our ability to obtain and maintain trademark registrations and acquire enforceable trademark rights depends on making use of our marks in commerce, meaning we must make a certain amount of progress, depending on the jurisdiction, in our clinical studies or in the commercialization of our products. If we fail to satisfy these requirements or any other requirements of applicable regulatory authorities, we may not have enforceable trademark rights or registrations in such jurisdictions. In addition, the registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names that we own may be challenged, infringed, circumvented, declared generic, lapsed or determined to be infringing on or dilutive of other marks. We may be unable to develop any enforceable trademark rights in relevant countries, or to protect the rights that we do develop. We may be forced to stop using our trademarks or trade names, which we need for name recognition by potential partners and customers in our markets of interest, and spend time and money rebranding. In addition, third parties have filed, and may in the future file, for registration of trademarks similar or identical to our trademarks, thereby impeding our ability to build brand identity and possibly leading to market confusion. If they succeed in registering or developing common law rights in such trademarks, and if we are not successful in enforcing our rights, we may not be able to use these trademarks to develop brand recognition of our company, technologies, products or services. In addition, there could be potential trade name or trademark infringement litigation brought against us by owners of other trademarks that incorporate variations of our registered or unregistered trademarks or trade names. During the trademark registration process, we may receive office actions from the USPTO or from comparable agencies in foreign jurisdictions refusing to register our trademarks. Although we would be given an opportunity to respond to those refusals, we may be unable to overcome them. In addition, in the USPTO and in comparable agencies in many foreign jurisdictions, third parties are given an opportunity to oppose pending trademark applications and to seek the cancellation of registered trademarks. Opposition or cancellation proceedings may in the future be filed against our trademark applications or registrations, and our trademark applications or registrations may not survive such proceedings. In addition, third parties may file first for our trademarks or similar variations thereof in certain countries. If they succeed in registering such trademarks, and if we are not successful in challenging such third-party rights, we may not be able to use these trademarks to market our products in those countries. If we do not secure registrations for our trademarks, we may encounter more difficulty in enforcing them against third parties than we otherwise would. If we are unable to establish name recognition based on our trademarks and trade names, we may be unable to compete effectively, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Intellectual property rights do not necessarily address all potential threats. The degree of future protection afforded by our intellectual property rights is uncertain because intellectual property rights have limitations and may not adequately protect our business or permit us to maintain our competitive advantage. For example: • others may be able to make products that are similar to any product candidates we may develop or utilize similar technology but that are not covered by the claims of the patents that we own or license now or in the future; • we, or our current or future licensors, might not have been the first to make the inventions covered by the issued patents or pending patent applications that we own or license now or in the future; • we, or our current or future licensors, might not have been the first to file patent applications covering certain of our or their inventions; • others may independently develop similar or alternative technologies or duplicate any of our technologies without infringing our owned or licensed intellectual property rights; • it is possible that our pending owned or licensed patent applications or those that we may own or license in the future will not lead to issued patents; 72 • issued patents that we hold rights to may be held invalid or unenforceable, including as a result of legal challenges by other persons; • our competitors might conduct research and development activities in the U.S. under FDA-related safe harbor patent infringement exemptions and/or in countries where we do not have patent rights and then use the information learned from such activities to develop competitive products for sale in our major commercial markets; • we may not develop additional proprietary technologies that are patentable; • the patents or pending patent applications of others may harm our business; and • we may choose not to file for patent protection in order to maintain certain trade secrets or know-how, and a third party may subsequently file for and obtain a patent covering such intellectual property. Should any of these events occur, they could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Risks Related to Our Business Operations, Employee Matters and Managing Growth Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies caused by layoffs, funding shortages or global health concerns could negatively impact our business. The ability of the FDA to review proposed clinical trials or approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory, and policy changes, the FDA’s ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s ability to perform routine functions. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, including executive and congressional priorities, the impacts of which are inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies may slow the time necessary for new product candidates to be reviewed and/or approved, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities. In addition, the current administration has implemented substantial reductions in force at various government agencies including the FDA, which could significantly reduce the FDA’s capacity to perform its functions in a manner consistent with its past practices and could negatively impact our business. Our business, operations and clinical development plans and timelines and supply chain could be adversely affected by the effects of health epidemics, on the manufacturing, clinical trial and other business activities performed by us or by third parties with whom we conduct business, including our CMOs, CROs, shippers and others. Our business could be adversely affected by health epidemics wherever we have clinical trial sites or other business operations. In addition, health epidemics could cause significant disruption in the operations of CMOs, CROs and other third parties upon whom we rely. For example, the COVID-19 pandemic presented a substantial public health and economic challenge around the world and affected employees, patients, communities and business operations, as well as the U.S. economy and financial markets. Geographic regions imposed “shelter-in-place” orders, quarantines or similar orders or restrictions to control the spread of epidemic disease. These and similar, and perhaps more severe, disruptions in our operations could negatively impact our business, operating results and financial condition. We are dependent on a worldwide supply chain for products to be used in our clinical trials and, if approved by the regulatory authorities, for commercialization. Quarantines, shelter-in-place and similar government orders, or the expectation that such orders, shutdowns or other restrictions could occur may impact personnel at third-party manufacturing facilities in the U.S. and other countries, or the availability or cost of materials or supplies, which could disrupt our supply chain or our ability to enroll patients in or perform testing for our clinical trials. In addition, closures of transportation carriers and modal hubs could materially impact our clinical development and any future commercialization timelines. If our relationships with our suppliers or other vendors are terminated or scaled back as a result of health epidemics, we may not be able to enter into arrangements with alternative suppliers or vendors or do so on commercially reasonable terms or in a timely manner. Switching or adding additional suppliers or vendors involves 73 substantial cost and requires management time and focus. In addition, there is a natural transition period when a new supplier or vendor commences work. As a result, delays generally occur, which could adversely impact our ability to meet our desired clinical development and any future commercialization timelines. Although we carefully manage our relationships with our suppliers and vendors, there can be no assurance that we will not encounter challenges or delays in the future or that these delays or challenges will not have an adverse impact on our business, financial condition and prospects. See “Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Dependence on Third Parties.” In addition, our clinical trials may be affected by health epidemics. In the future, clinical site initiation and patient enrollment may be delayed due to prioritization of hospital resources toward such health epidemics or concerns among patients about participating in clinical trials during a health epidemic and public health measures imposed by the respective national governments of countries in which the clinical sites are located. Some patients may have difficulty following certain aspects of clinical trial protocols if quarantines impede patient movement or interrupt healthcare services. Similarly, our inability to successfully recruit and retain patients and principal investigators and site staff who, as healthcare providers, may have heightened exposure to epidemic disease or experience additional restrictions by their institutions, city or state governments could adversely impact our clinical trial operations. Health epidemics may lead to disruption and volatility in the global capital markets, which increases the cost of, and adversely impacts access to, capital and increases economic uncertainty. Health epidemics may also result in volatile trading prices for the Common Stock of biopharmaceutical companies. To the extent health epidemics adversely affect our business, financial results and value of our Common Stock, it may also affect our ability to access capital, which could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. Our future success depends on our ability to retain Dr. Hung and our other key employees, consultants and advisors and to attract, retain and motivate qualified personnel. We are highly dependent on the management, research and development, clinical, financial and business development expertise of Dr. Hung and our executive officers, as well as the other members of our scientific, clinical and commercial teams. Although we have employment offer letters with each of our executive officers, each of them may terminate their employment with us at any time. We do not maintain “key person” insurance for any of our executives or employees. Recruiting and retaining qualified scientific and clinical personnel and, if we are successful in obtaining marketing approval for our product candidates, commercial personnel, is critical to our success. The loss of the services of our executive officers or other key employees could impede the achievement of our research, development and commercialization objectives and seriously harm our ability to successfully implement our business strategy. In particular, in light of Dr. Hung’s central role in the discovery of all of our current product candidates, our ongoing discovery activities and development programs, the recruitment of our other executives and key employees and all other aspects of our strategy and operations, we believe our loss of Dr. Hung’s services for any reason would severely impair our business and prospects. Replacing executive officers and key employees may be difficult and may take an extended period of time because of the limited number of individuals in our industry with the breadth of skills and experience required to successfully develop, gain regulatory approval for and commercialize our product candidates. Competition to hire qualified personnel in our industry is intense, and we may be unable to hire, train, retain or motivate these key personnel on acceptable terms given the competition among numerous pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for similar personnel. Furthermore, to the extent we hire personnel from competitors, we may be subject to allegations that they have been improperly solicited or that they have divulged proprietary or other confidential information, or that their former employers own their research output. We also experience competition for the hiring of scientific and clinical personnel from universities and research institutions. In addition, we rely on consultants and advisors, including scientific and clinical advisors, to assist us in formulating our research and development and commercialization strategy. Our consultants and advisors may be employed by employers other than us and may have commitments under consulting or advisory contracts with other entities that may limit their availability to us. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high quality personnel, our ability to pursue our growth strategy will be limited, and could harm our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We expect to expand our development, regulatory, sales, marketing and distribution capabilities, and as a result, we may encounter difficulties in managing our growth, which could disrupt our operations. 74 As of December 31, 2025, we had 298 employees. As our preclinical and clinical development progresses, we expect to experience growth in the number of our employees and the scope of our operations, particularly in the areas of research, clinical operations, regulatory affairs, general and administrative, marketing approval, sales, marketing and distribution. To manage our anticipated future growth, we must continue to implement and improve our managerial, operational and financial systems, expand our facilities and continue to recruit and train additional qualified personnel. Due to our limited financial resources and the limited experience of our management team in managing a company with such anticipated growth, we may not be able to effectively manage the expansion of our operations or recruit and train additional qualified personnel. The expansion of our operations may lead to significant costs and may divert our management and business development resources. Any inability to manage growth could delay the execution of our business plans or disrupt our operations. Our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs and vendors may engage in misconduct or other improper activities, including non-compliance with regulatory standards and requirements. We are exposed to the risk that our employees, independent contractors, consultants, commercial collaborators, principal investigators, CROs and vendors may engage in fraudulent conduct or other illegal activity. Misconduct by these parties could include intentional, reckless or negligent conduct or unauthorized activities that violates (1) the laws, regulations and guidance of the FDA, the European Commission, the EMA, the MHRA, NMPA and other similar regulatory authorities, including those laws requiring the reporting of true, complete and accurate information to such authorities, (2) manufacturing standards, (3) federal and state data privacy, security, fraud and abuse and other healthcare laws and regulations in the U.S. and abroad and (4) laws that require the true, complete and accurate reporting of financial information or data. In particular, sales, marketing and business arrangements in the healthcare industry are subject to extensive laws and regulations intended to prevent fraud, misconduct, kickbacks, self-dealing and other abusive practices. These laws and regulations may restrict or prohibit a wide range of pricing, discounting, marketing and promotion, sales commission, customer incentive programs and other business arrangements. Misconduct by these parties could also involve the improper use of individually identifiable information, including information obtained in the course of clinical trials, creating fraudulent data in our preclinical studies or clinical trials or illegal misappropriation of product candidates, which could result in regulatory sanctions and serious harm to our reputation. We have adopted a code of business conduct and ethics, but it is not always possible to identify and deter misconduct by employees and other third parties, and the precautions we take to detect and prevent this activity may not be effective in controlling unknown or unmanaged risks or losses or in protecting us from governmental investigations or other actions or lawsuits stemming from a failure to be in compliance with such laws or regulations. Additionally, we are subject to the risk that a person or government could allege such fraud or other misconduct, even if none occurred. If any such actions are instituted against us, and we are not successful in defending ourselves or asserting our rights, those actions could have a significant impact on our business, including the imposition of significant civil, criminal and administrative penalties, including damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, contractual damages, reputational harm and the delay, reduction, termination or restructuring of our operations. If our information technology systems or those of third parties with whom we work, or our data are or were compromised, we could experience adverse consequences resulting from such compromise, including but not limited to regulatory investigations or actions; litigation; fines and penalties; disruptions of our business operations; reputational harm; loss of revenue or profits; and other adverse consequences. In the ordinary course of business, we and the third parties with whom we work, process sensitive data, and, as a result, we and the third parties with whom we work face a variety of evolving threats that could cause security incidents. Cyber-attacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud, and other similar activities threaten the confidentiality, integrity, and availability of our sensitive data and information technology systems, and those of the third parties upon with whom we work. Such threats are prevalent and continue to rise, are increasingly difficult to detect, and come from a variety of sources, including traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through theft or misuse), sophisticated nation states, and nation-state-supported actors. Some actors now engage and are expected to continue to engage in cyber-attacks, including without limitation nation-state actors for geopolitical reasons and in conjunction with military conflicts and defense activities. During 75 times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties with whom we work may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks, including retaliatory cyber-attacks, that could materially disrupt our systems and operations, supply chain, and ability to produce, sell and distribute our services. We and the third parties upon which we rely are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to social-engineering attacks (including through deep fakes, which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake, and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), malware (including as a result of advanced persistent threat intrusions), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, ransomware attacks, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, loss of data or other information technology assets, adware, attacks enhanced or facilitated by artificial intelligence (“AI”), telecommunications failures, earthquakes, fires, floods, and other similar threats. In particular, severe ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, ability to provide our products or services, loss of sensitive data and income, reputational harm, and diversion of funds. Extortion payments may alleviate the negative impact of a ransomware attack, but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments due to, for example, applicable laws or regulations prohibiting such payments. Remote work has increased risks to our information technology systems and data, as more of our personnel utilize network connections, computers, and devices outside our premises or network, including working at home, while in transit or in public locations. Additionally, future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities present in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during due diligence of such acquired or integrated entities, and it may be difficult to integrate companies into our information technology environment and security program. In addition, our reliance on third parties could introduce new cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities, including supply-chain attacks, and other threats to our business operations. We rely on various third parties and technologies to operate critical business systems to process sensitive data in a variety of contexts, including, without limitation, cloud-based infrastructure, data center facilities, encryption and authentication technology, personnel email, and other functions. We also rely on third parties to provide other products, services, parts, or otherwise to operate our business. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited, and these third parties may not have adequate information security measures in place. If the third parties with whom we work experience a security incident or other interruption, we could experience adverse consequences. While we may be entitled to damages if such third parties fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any award may be insufficient to cover our damages, or we may be unable to recover such award. In addition, supply-chain attacks have increased in frequency and severity, and we cannot guarantee that third parties’ infrastructure in our supply chain or our third-party partners’ supply chains have not been compromised. While we have implemented security measures designed to protect against security incidents, there can be no assurance that these measures will be effective. Actions taken by us or the third parties with whom we work to detect, investigate, mitigate, contain, and remediate a security incident could result in outages, data losses, and disruptions of our business. Threat actors may also gain access to other networks and systems after a compromise of our networks and systems. For example, threat actors may use an initial compromise of one part of our environment to gain access to the networks or systems of third parties with whom we work, such as through phishing or supply chain attacks. We take steps designed to detect, mitigate, and remediate vulnerabilities in our information systems (such as our hardware and/or software, including that of third parties upon which we rely). We may not, however, detect and remediate all such vulnerabilities including on a timely basis. Further, we may experience delays in developing and deploying remedial measures and patches designed to address identified vulnerabilities. Vulnerabilities could be exploited and result in a security incident. Any of the previously identified or similar threats could cause a security incident or other interruption that could result in unauthorized, unlawful, or accidental acquisition, modification, destruction, loss, alteration, encryption, disclosure of, or access to our sensitive data or our information technology systems, or those of the third parties with whom we work. A security incident or other interruption could disrupt our ability (and that of third parties upon whom we rely) to provide our services. We may expend significant resources or modify our business activities (including our clinical trial activities) to try to protect against security incidents. Additionally, certain data privacy and security obligations may require us to 76 implement and maintain specific security measures or industry-standard or reasonable security measures to protect our information technology systems and sensitive data. Applicable data privacy and security obligations may require us to notify relevant stakeholders, including affected individuals, regulators, and investors, of security incidents, or to implement other requirements, such as providing credit monitoring. Such disclosures and compliance with such requirements are costly, and the disclosure or the failure to comply with such requirements could lead to adverse consequences. If we (or a third party with whom we work) experience a security incident or are perceived to have experienced a security incident, we may experience adverse consequences, such as government enforcement actions (for example, investigations, fines, penalties, audits, and inspections); additional reporting requirements and/or oversight; restrictions on processing sensitive data (including personal data); litigation (including class claims); indemnification obligations; negative publicity; reputational harm; monetary fund diversions; diversion of management attention; interruptions in our operations (including availability of data); financial loss; and other similar harms. Security incidents and attendant consequences may negatively impact our ability to grow and operate our business. Our contracts may not contain limitations of liability, and even where they do, there can be no assurance that limitations of liability in our contracts are sufficient to protect us from liabilities, damages, or claims related to our data privacy and security obligations. We cannot be sure that our insurance coverage, if any, will be adequate or sufficient to protect us from or to mitigate liabilities arising out of our privacy and security practices, that such coverage will continue to be available on commercially reasonable terms or at all, or that such coverage will pay future claims. In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive data about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position. Additionally, sensitive data of the Company could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our personnel’s or vendors’ use of generative AI technologies. Risks Related to Doing Business in China and Our International Operations International trade policies, including tariffs, sanctions and trade barriers, including changes in the political and economic policies and relations between the U.S. and China, have adversely impacted and may continue to adversely impact our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. We operate in a global economy, and our business depends on a global supply chain for the development, manufacturing, and distribution of our pharmaceutical products, and for the advancement of our preclinical and clinical development programs. There is inherent risk based on the complex relationships among the U.S. and the countries in which we conduct our business, and due to our operations in China, such that political, diplomatic, and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. We import taletrectinib, safusidenib and other materials that we source from China. Tariffs have been imposed on these materials, and additional tariff policies on pharmaceutical products could materially increase our costs and reduce our profitability, including as a result of our inability to adjust pricing in formulary-based markets. Recent and potential future changes in international trade policies, particularly regarding U.S.-China trade relations and pharmaceutical-specific tariffs, present material risks to our operations and financial performance. The current international trade and regulatory environment is subject to significant ongoing uncertainty. The ongoing trade tensions between the U.S. and other jurisdictions have resulted in multiple rounds of tariffs and anticipated tariffs affecting pharmaceuticals and pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug products, manufacturing equipment, and related supplies. The Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, has initiated an investigation to determine whether pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug product, manufactured outside the United States pose a national security risk and should be subject to additional tariffs. Unlike consumer goods, pharmaceuticals face unique regulatory constraints that make rapid supply chain adjustments particularly difficult and costly. Should current tariffs hold or additional tariffs be imposed, our costs will rise significantly, and it would be difficult and costly to qualify alternative sources within other jurisdictions with lower tariff rates or within the United States, as developing and qualifying alternative sources typically requires up to two years, with substantial investment and regulatory approval requirements. Moreover, the dynamic and unpredictable tariff and trade landscape creates substantial uncertainty and significant planning challenges for our operations. 77 Changes in tariff classifications, country-of-origin requirements, or customs procedures can occur with limited notice. This uncertainty complicates our long-term investment decisions regarding manufacturing facilities, supply chain optimization, and research and development locations. We do not have our own manufacturing capabilities and rely, and will rely, on third parties, including Asymchem, Wuxi STA and Wuxi AppTec in China, to produce clinical or commercial supplies of taletrectinib, clinical supplies of safusidenib and potentially other future product candidates. In addition, we conduct research activities and have business operations both in the U.S. and China, and any unfavorable government policies on cross-border relations and/or international trade, including increased scrutiny on companies with certain operations based in China, capital controls or tariffs, may affect the competitive position of our products and product candidates, the hiring of scientists and other research and development personnel, the demand for our products and product candidates, our ability to raise capital, and our ability to sell IBTROZI or any of our product candidates that receives marketing approval in certain countries. Moreover, the dynamic and unpredictable tariff and trade landscape creates substantial uncertainty and significant planning challenges for our operations. Changes in tariff classifications, country-of-origin requirements, or customs procedures can occur with limited notice. This uncertainty complicates our long-term investment decisions regarding manufacturing facilities, supply chain optimization, and research and development locations. Unlike many industries, our ability to pass increased costs to customers is limited by the structure of pharmaceutical pricing and reimbursement systems. Formularies that include IBTROZI have pricing established through annual or multi-year contracts with commercial, third-party payors and pharmacy benefit managers, and reimbursement methodologies established by government programs, such as Medicare. These arrangements typically include fixed pricing terms that were negotiated prior to the implementation of the recently announced tariffs. As a result, and depending on the timing and scope of the implementation of these tariffs, cost increases due to tariffs may be difficult or impossible to pass through to customers until the next negotiation cycle, which could be up to 36 months away. Current or future tariffs will result in increased research and development expenses, including with respect to increased costs associated with APIs, raw materials, laboratory equipment and research materials and components. We cannot at this time predict the ultimate impact of tariffs and trade restrictions and anticipate that our cost of goods will be adversely affected to some degree, depending on the ultimate scope and duration of tariffs and trade restrictions imposed. Trade restrictions affecting the import of materials necessary for clinical trials could result in delays to our development timelines. Given the nature of our product candidates, ongoing establishment of additional sources of manufacturing supply outside of China is a time-consuming process making it difficult for us to react quickly to a rapidly changing environment. If there are delays in qualifying new suppliers or facilities or a new supplier is unable to meet regulatory requirements for approval, and if it becomes necessary to source material from such new supplier, there could be a shortage of the affected products for the marketplace or for use in clinical studies, or both, which could negatively impact our anticipated revenues and could potentially cause us to breach contractual obligations with customers. Moreover, these tariffs could introduce significant transfer pricing challenges for us, including adapting our transfer pricing arrangements to account for increased costs associated with importing goods and implementing pricing changes in a manner that complies with applicable customs and transfer pricing rules, which we may be unable to do in a timely manner or at all, particularly given the current international trade and tariff fluidity, which could result in the modification or elimination of the tax deductibility of various currently deductible payments and otherwise increase the tax burden of our operating or being a resident in a particular country. Increased costs and extended commercialization and development timelines could place us at a competitive disadvantage compared to companies operating in regions with more favorable trade relationships and could reduce investor confidence and negatively impact our business, results of operations, financial condition and growth prospects. The complexity of announced or future tariffs may also increase the risk that we or our customers or suppliers may be subject to civil or criminal enforcement actions in the U.S. or foreign jurisdictions related to compliance with trade regulations. Foreign governments may also adopt non-tariff measures, such as procurement preferences or informal disincentives to engage with, purchase from or invest in U.S. entities, which may limit our ability to compete internationally and attract non-U.S. investment, employees, customers and suppliers. Foreign governments may also take other retaliatory actions against U.S. entities, such as decreased intellectual property protection, increased enforcement actions, or delays in regulatory approvals, which may result in heightened international legal and operational risks. In addition, the U.S. and other governments have imposed and may continue to impose additional sanctions, such as trade restrictions or trade barriers, which could restrict us from doing business directly or indirectly in or with certain countries or parties and may impose additional costs and complexity to our business. In particular, 78 the Chinese government has implemented various measures to encourage economic development and guide the allocation of resources, which may benefit the overall Chinese economy but may have a negative effect on us. Due to our operations in China, any future Chinese, U.S. or other rules and regulations that place restrictions on capital raising or other activities by companies with operations in China could negatively affect our business and results of operations. If the business environment in China deteriorates from the perspective of domestic or international investment, or if relations between China and the U.S. or other governments deteriorate and geopolitical tensions between China and the U.S. increase, our business in China and the U.S. may be adversely impacted. Further, the continued threats of new or increased tariffs, sanctions, trade restrictions and trade barriers as well as ongoing changes in U.S. a