Protara Therapeutics, Inc. 10-K

Item 1. Business. Overview We are a New York City based clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company committed to advancing transformative therapies for the treatment of cancer and rare diseases. We were founded on the principle of applying modern scientific, regulatory or manufacturing advancements to established mechanisms in order to create new development opportunities. We prioritize creativity, diverse perspectives, integrity and tenacity to expedite our goal of bringing life-changing therapies to people with limited treatment options. Our portfolio includes two development programs utilizing TARA-002, an investigational cell therapy based on the broad immunopotentiator, OK-432, which was originally granted marketing approval by the Japanese Ministry of Health and Welfare as an immunopotentiating cancer therapeutic agent. This cell therapy is currently approved in Japan and Taiwan for LMs and multiple oncologic indications. We have secured worldwide rights to the asset excluding Japan and Taiwan and are exploring its use in oncology and rare disease indications. TARA-002 was developed from the same master cell bank of genetically distinct group A Streptococcus pyogenes as OK-432 (marketed as Picibanil® in Japan and Taiwan by Chugai Pharmaceutical Co., Ltd., or Chugai Pharmaceutical). We are currently developing TARA-002 in non-muscle invasive bladder cancer, or NMIBC, and in LMs. Our lead oncology program is TARA-002 in NMIBC, which is cancer found in the tissue that lines the inner surface of the bladder that has not spread into the bladder muscle. Bladder cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the United States, with NMIBC representing approximately 80% of bladder cancer diagnoses. Approximately 65,000 patients are diagnosed with NMIBC in the United States each year. Very few new therapeutics have been approved for NMIBC since the 1990s and the current standard of care for NMIBC includes intravesical Bacillus Calmette–Guérin, or BCG. The mechanism of action of TARA-002 is similar to that of BCG. TARA-002 and BCG are both intravesically administered, elicit a Th1 type immune response and produce a similar array of locally activated cytokines and immune cells. We are conducting a Phase 1 dose-finding, open-label clinical trial to evaluate TARA-002 in treatment-naïve and treatment-experienced NMIBC patients with carcinoma in situ, or CIS, and high-grade papillary tumors (Ta), known as the ADVANCED-1 trial. In the initial dose escalation phase, or Phase 1a portion, of the trial, patients receive six weekly intravesical doses of TARA-002. The primary objective of the trial is to evaluate the safety, tolerability and preliminary signs of anti-tumor activity of TARA-002, with the goal of establishing a recommended dose for a future Phase 2 clinical trial. The trial is ongoing and we expect data from the Phase 1a portion of the trial in the second quarter of 2023. We are also pursuing TARA-002 in LMs, which are rare, non-malignant cysts of the lymphatic vascular system that primarily form in the head and neck region of children before the age of two. In July 2020, the FDA granted Rare Pediatric Disease designation for TARA-002 for the treatment of LMs and in May 2022, the European Medicines Agency granted orphan drug designation to TARA-002 for the treatment of LMs. In addition to the clinical experience in Japan, we have secured the rights to a dataset from one of the largest ever conducted Phase 2 trials in LMs, in which OK-432 was administered via a compassionate use program led by the University of Iowa to over 500 pediatric and adult patients. We have an open IND for LMs with the Vaccines and Related Products Division of the FDA, or Vaccines Division. We received feedback from the Vaccines Division on the protocol for our proposed Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating TARA-002 in LMs. In the second half of 2023 we expect to initiate this Phase 2 single arm, open-label clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TARA-002 in pediatric patients with macrocystic and mixed-cystic LMs. The trial design includes a safety lead-in phase followed by an expansion phase. We are conducting trial preparation activities and have identified multiple trial sites. 3 The third development program in our portfolio is intravenous, or IV, Choline Chloride, an investigational phospholipid substrate replacement therapy initially in development for patients receiving parenteral nutrition, or PN, who have intestinal failure associated liver disease, or IFALD. IV Choline Chloride has been granted Orphan Drug Designation by the FDA for this indication and has also been granted Fast Track Designation for the treatment of IFALD. Following a positive end of Phase 2 meeting with the FDA, we received feedback on the design of the studies necessary to complete a registration package for IV Choline Chloride for the treatment of IFALD, including a Phase 1 pharmacokinetic, or PK, trial and a Phase 3 clinical trial. Prior to initiating these clinical trials, we are conducting a prevalence study to enhance understanding of the PN patient population and we plan to use this information to determine the next steps for the development program. In September 2021, we reported results of the retrospective part of the prevalence study, which supported the significant unmet medical need in patients dependent on PN who have IFALD. We are currently conducting the prospective part of the prevalence study, which is a multi-center, cross-sectional observational study to assess the prevalence of choline deficiency, as well as cholestasis and steatosis, in patients dependent on PN. We expect to have results of the study in the third quarter of 2023. In April 2022, the U.S. Patent and Trademark office, or USPTO, issued to us Patent No. US 11,311,503 claiming a sterile aqueous choline salt composition with a term expiring in 2041. We have devoted substantial efforts to the development of these programs but do not have any approved products and have not generated any revenue from product sales. TARA-002 has not yet been approved for use for treatment of NMIBC, LMs or any other indications. We do not expect to generate revenues in the near-term, if ever. To finance our current strategic plans, including the conduct of ongoing and future clinical trials and further research and development costs, we will need to raise additional capital. See “Item 7. Management’s Discussion and Analysis of Financial Condition and Results of Operations—Liquidity and Capital Resources” for additional information about our liquidity and capital resource needs. Our Product Candidate Pipeline The following chart summarizes the current status of our product candidate pipeline: * TARA-002 Granted Rare Pediatric Disease Designation for the treatment of LMs ** Granted Orphan Drug and Fast Track Designations by the U.S. FDA † Phase 1 PK study to be conducted in addition to Phase 3 study Our Corporate Strategy: We are an oncology and rare disease company focused on applying modern scientific advancements to established mechanisms to deliver efficient de-risked clinical programs. Leveraging the drug development and commercialization experience of our management team, our goal is to build a leading biopharmaceutical company focused on bringing life-saving therapies to patients with significant unmet needs. Our current key initiatives are listed below: 4 1. Progress clinical program supporting TARA-002 for the treatment of NMIBC. Complete the ongoing Phase 1 clinical trial to assess the safety and tolerability of TARA-002 in patients with high-grade NMIBC, involving a dose escalation phase in which we are evaluating the safety, tolerability and preliminary signs of anti-tumor activity of TARA-002 to determine dosage for a future Phase 2 clinical trial. We then intend to further assess safety and preliminary signs of anti-tumor activity of TARA-002 in both BCG-naïve and BCG-exposed NMIBC patients with CIS in an expanded cohort of our Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials. 2. Progress clinical program for TARA-002 in LMs by initiating a Phase 2 clinical trial in patients with macrocystic and mixed-cystic LMs. Based on the robust dataset for the originator product OK-432 in LMs and the full Clinical Study Report, or CSR of the randomized Phase 2 clinical trial of OK-432 in LMs led by the University of Iowa, we are encouraged by the potential for TARA-002 to treat patients with LMs. Following feedback from the Vaccines Division, we expect to initiate a Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating TARA-002 in pediatric patients with macrocystic and mixed-cystic LMs. 3. Complete prospective prevalence study of patients receiving PN and who have IFALD to refine a development pathway for IV Choline Chloride. We are currently conducting a prospective prevalence study to enhance understanding of the PN patient population and plan to use this information to inform the next steps for the development program. We received FDA feedback on a potential design of the studies necessary to complete a registration package for IV Choline Chloride for the treatment of IFALD, including a Phase 1 pharmacokinetic study and a Phase 3 trial. We intend to use the results of our multinational prevalence study of the PN patient population to inform our strategy for IV Choline Chloride. 4. Explore opportunities to expand our pipeline of uses for TARA-002 alone and in combination with other therapies. We are exploring the use of TARA-002 in combination with other therapies and are working to identify additional opportunities to develop TARA-002 in indications beyond NMIBC and LMs. We are conducting non-clinical experiments and modeling to better characterize the potential benefits of combination therapy with TARA-002, particularly in NMIBC. In addition, our leadership team has a strong track record of licensing, acquiring and optimizing product candidates and we intend to leverage this skill set to identify opportunities for potential combination opportunities for TARA-002, in NMIBC and other oncology indications. The immunological activity of TARA-002’s originator product, OK-432, has been effectively interrogated in patients in numerous indications. We plan to continue to carefully evaluate the case reports and the literature and perform non-clinical characterization studies to better understand the mechanism of action of TARA-002 and its potential activity in indications beyond NMIBC and LM in which there is unmet need. Our Pipeline TARA-002 TARA-002, our lead program, is an investigational cell therapy developed from the master cell line of the same genetically distinct Streptococcus pyogenes (group A, type 3) Su strain as OK-432, a broad immunopotentiator marketed as Picibanil® in Japan and Taiwan by Chugai Pharmaceutical. We are using the same regulatory starting materials as OK-432 and manufacture TARA-002 using an updated version of the same proprietary processes used to manufacture OK-432. We have designated this product candidate as TARA-002 in order to differentiate the regulatory path in the United States and other geographies from that of OK-432 in Japan. We entered into an agreement with Chugai Pharmaceutical in June 2019, as amended in July 2020, to support our development of TARA-002. The agreement provides us with exclusive access to certain materials and documents relating to OK-432 including the master cell bank of Streptococcus pyogenes used in the manufacturing of OK-432. Additionally, the agreement provides technical support during a certain period. We have utilized the materials, proprietary manufacturing process and technical support provided by Chugai Pharmaceutical to produce TARA-002 at a cGMP-compliant facility in the United States. Under the agreement with Chugai Pharmaceutical, we have sole responsibility for the development and commercialization of TARA-002 worldwide, excluding Japan and Taiwan. This agreement is exclusive through June 17, 2030, or following any termination of the agreement by either party. 5 In Japan, OK-432 is indicated for: the treatment of lymphangiomas (lymphatic malformations); the prolongation of survival time in patients with gastric cancer (postoperative cases) or primary lung cancer in combination with chemotherapy; and the reduction of cancerous pleural effusion or ascites in patients with lung cancer or gastrointestinal cancer respectively, head and neck cancer (maxillary cancer, laryngeal cancer, pharyngeal cancer, and tongue cancer) and thyroid cancer that are resistant to other drugs. We plan to pursue development of TARA-002 for the treatment of NMIBC and LMs initially in the United States, and plan to also seek approval in Europe and other regions in the future and may also explore additional indications where its utility as an immunostimulant has been hypothesized to be of therapeutic benefit. TARA-002 in NMIBC Disease Overview Bladder cancer is the sixth most common cancer in the United States, with NMIBC representing approximately 80% of bladder cancer diagnoses. NMIBC is cancer found in the tissue that lines the inner surface of the bladder that has not spread into the bladder muscle. There are three subtypes of NMIBC: Ta (non-invasive papillary carcinoma), Tis (carcinoma in situ or CIS), and T1 (carcinoma invading the lamina propria). Among the types of NMIBC, Ta accounts for most NMIBC cases (70%), whereas T1 and CIS account for 20% and 10%, respectively. There are approximately 65,000 incident cases of NMIBC in the United States every year, and based upon currently available data we believe that approximately 45% (approximately 30,000) are made up of High-Grade tumor types that are considered higher risk, and therefore candidates for immunotherapies, such as TARA-002. In addition, NMIBC has one of the highest rates of recurrence with three-year rate estimated at up to 80%. Treatment Treatment for NMIBC is typically targeted to reduce unresectable persistence, recurrence after resection and to prevent disease progression to muscle-invasive bladder cancer. The initial treatment for NMIBC includes cystoscopy and complete transurethral resection of the bladder tumor (TURBT) for papillary Ta or T1, or biopsy for CIS. A single postoperative instillation of intravesical chemotherapy is recommended in patients with low risk of progression, and for patients with intermediate and high-risk disease, a longer course of intravesical therapy is administered. The most efficacious intravesical agent to date has been BCG, a live attenuated form of Mycobacterium bovis . BCG has been the subject of multiple supply shortages in the US in the past decade due to the inability to meet demand to treat the large population of patients with NMIBC. There has been a significant increase in bladder cancer recurrence and progression with an escalated number of patients who require cystectomy. As such, with the current BCG shortage and limited effective alternate therapies or dosing strategies, there continues to be a significant unmet need for treatment options for patients with NMIBC. Clinical Development We are currently conducting our ADVANCED-1 trial. In the initial dose escalation phase of the trial, patients receive six weekly intravesical doses of TARA-002. The primary objective of the trial is to evaluate the safety, tolerability and preliminary signs of anti-tumor activity of TARA-002, with the goal of establishing a recommended dose for a future Phase 2 clinical trial. The trial is ongoing and we expect data from the Phase 1a portion of the trial in the second quarter of 2023. Preclinical Development We continue to conduct pre-clinical studies on TARA-002 to better characterize the mechanism of action to help us understand how TARA-002 may perform in potential combinations with other agents used to treat NMIBC. In addition, we use pre-clinical data to help us define other cancer targets for TARA-002 both within the urothelial cancer space and other types of cancer affecting different parts of the body. Regulatory Interactions In October 2021, we announced that the Office of Tissues and Advanced Therapies Division, or the OTAT Division, of the FDA’s Center for Biologics Evaluation and Research, or CBER, cleared our Investigational New Drug, or IND, application for TARA-002 in NMIBC, allowing us to commence our ADVANCED-1 trial. The primary objective of the trial is to evaluate the safety, tolerability and preliminary signs of anti-tumor activity of TARA-002, with the goal of establishing a recommended dose for a future Phase 2 clinical trial. 6 Manufacturing We manufacture TARA-002 using an equivalent, but modernized, proprietary manufacturing process as is used to produce OK-432 by Chugai Pharmaceutical, starting with a master cell line propagated by us but utilizing the same genetically distinct strain of Streptococcus pyogenes (A group, type 3) Su strain as OK-432. We have contracted a contract development and manufacturing organization, or CDMO, to manufacture TARA-002. TARA-002 for the Treatment of Lymphatic Malformations Disease Overview We have worked with the FDA to align on a regulatory pathway and development plan for TARA-002 for the treatment of LMs. The International Society for the Study of Vascular Anomalies classifies LMs as either macrocystic, microcystic, or mixed-cystic. Macrocystic and microcystic LMs are differentiated by the size of the fluid-containing portion of the malformation. Macrocystic LMs are characteristically large, fluid-filled cysts with a thin endothelial lining. Macrocystic LMs are composed of cysts greater than 2 cubic centimeters in size and present as a soft, fluid-filled swelling beneath normal or slightly discolored skin. Macrocystic LMs are usually located in the antero-lateral cervical region of the neck; however, it is possible for this type of LM to originate in other areas of the body. In contrast, microcystic LMs have very limited internal space with a thick irregular endothelial lining. Microcystic LMs are comprised of cysts less than 2 cubic centimeters in size and are often composed of micro-lymphatic channels that integrate and infiltrate normal soft tissue. Microcystic LMs can involve both superficial and deep aspects including muscle and bone. Microcystic LMs can thicken or swell causing enlargement of surrounding soft tissue and bones and can be found on any area of the skin or mucous membrane. Mixed-cystic LMs are comprised of varying degrees of both macrocystic and microcystic LMs. While the exact prevalence of LMs is not known, in the United States, the condition is thought to be present in approximately one in every 4,000 live births and we believe there are approximately 1,400-1,800 LM cases per year. Treatment There are no approved pharmacotherapies for LMs, except in Japan and Taiwan where OK-432 is approved. In these countries, OK-432 has been the standard of care for LMs for over 25 years. Treatment of LMs varies depending on the symptoms and complications that present themselves. The standard of care outside Japan and Taiwan for the treatment of LMs is either a partial or complete surgical excision of the cysts. While surgery is the standard approach to the treatment of LMs in the head and neck, the region is a difficult area to operate on because of the large number of important anatomical structures in the area. Major venous and arterial trunks travel through the neck, as do important nerves. Surgery on such malformations frequently results in high rates of recurrence and complications including life-long chronic conditions, such as damage to nerves and other important structures of the head and neck. Clinical Development Historical Data on OK- 432, predecessor therapy to TARA-002 When OK-432 is administered locally for LMs, it is hypothesized that innate immune cells within the cyst are activated and produce a strong immune cascade. Neutrophils and monocytes infiltrate the cyst and various cytokines, including interleukins IL-6, IL-8, IL-12, interferon, or IFN, -gamma, tumor necrosis factor, or TNF-alpha, and vascular endothelial growth factor (VEGF) are secreted by immune cells within the cyst in response to the presence of OK-432. In concert, these immune activities induce a strong local inflammatory reaction in the cyst wall, resulting in fluid drainage, shrinkage and fibrotic adhesion of the cyst. 7 A randomized, phase 2 clinical trial led by the University of Iowa studied the use of OK-432 in patients with LM from 1998 to 2005. Most eligible subjects were between 6 months and 18 years of age with macrocystic or mixed-cystic LMs (with ≥ 50% macrocytic disease) of the head and/or neck. There were three treatment groups: immediate treatment (ITG), delayed treatment (DTG), and open label treatment group. The immediate treatment group received treatment with OK-432 upon diagnosis. The delayed treatment group received OK-432 treatment following a six-month observation period; the cross-over design was intended to investigate spontaneous resolution. The open-label treatment group included infants younger than six months of age, adults older than 18 years of age, patients with LMs involving sites other than the head and neck (such as the axilla, thorax, and extremities), and patients treated on an emergent basis. The open label treatment group were treated immediately with OK-432. Response to therapy was measured by quantitating change in lesion size. Clinical success was defined as a complete (90% to 100%) or substantial (60% to 89%) response to treatment based on radiographically confirmed shrinkage in lesions. Results presented in this report were based on a retrospective analysis of source verified data that included the full dataset of subjects enrolled in the Phase 2 randomized clinical trial between January 1998 and August 2005, including data in the published study (Smith et al. 2009) that included subjects enrolled between January 1998 and November 2004. Overall, 310 subjects were enrolled with intent to treat: 246 subjects were randomized to the immediate (ITG, N=171) and delayed (DTG, N=75) treatment groups; 64 subjects were nonrandomized and assigned to the open-label group. Analysis of the primary efficacy endpoint (N=150) demonstrated clinical success (complete and/or substantial response) in 69% of patients in the ITG 6 months after enrollment, while 7.5% of patients in the DTG experienced spontaneous regression of a LM during this time interval (p < 0.0001)). When the results were analyzed by lesion type across all treatment groups, a successful outcome was observed in 84% and 60% of patients with macrocystic and mixed-cystic LM, respectively. None of the patients with microcystic LM demonstrated clinical success with OK-432 therapy. The results of the retrospective analysis were consistent with the results observed in the original analysis (Smith et al. 2009). Figure 1: 69% of patients in the immediate treatment group had a complete or substantial response to OK-432, meeting the primary endpoint, while 7.5% of patients in the delayed treatment group had a complete or substantial response after six months of observation and before treatment. ǂ Clinical Success was defined as complete or substantial response. * Reflects data prior to dosing with OK-432. After dosing, the clinical success rate was 66%, which was not statistically different from the ITG. 8 Figure 2: patients with radiographically confirmed macrocystic lesions had the greatest likelihood of clinical success and in those patients with mixed lesions, clinical success was also present. ǂ Clinical Success was defined as complete or substantial response. * Reflects data prior to dosing with OK-432. After dosing, the clinical success rate was 66%, which was not statistically different from the ITG. ** Results were analyzed by lesion type across all treatment groups. TARA-002 Clinical Development We have an open IND for LMs with the Vaccines Division. Later in 2023 we expect to initiate a Phase 2 single arm, open-label clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TARA-002 in pediatric patients with macrocystic and mixed-cystic LMs. The trial design includes a safety lead-in phase followed by an expansion phase. We are conducting trial preparation activities and have identified multiple trial sites. Historical Safety Profile on OK-432, predecessor therapy to TARA-002 The most common adverse events with treatment with OK-432 were local injection site reactions, fever, fatigue, and decreased appetite, with resolution within two weeks. Treatment emergent serious adverse events or SAEs, (treatment emergent SAEs are defined as any SAE occurring or worsening on or after the first dose of study drug and within 35 days after the last dose of study drug) associated with OK-432 treatment were reported in 4.1% of patients, with the most severe events being airway obstruction and facial paralysis due to massive swelling post-injection that required tracheostomy and hospitalization. Both of these events were reported as resolved. The safety findings from the sponsor-conducted retrospective analysis are consistent with the original analysis reported in Smith et al. 2009, and with safety data in published studies in approximately 865 patients with LMs after treatment with OK-432. Historical Preclinical Development on OK-432, predecessor therapy to TARA-002 A comprehensive preclinical development program for OK-432, including in vitro and in vivo pharmacology and toxicology studies, was conducted by Chugai Pharmaceutical to support the filing of a NDA with the Japan Pharmaceuticals and Medical Devices Agency. We believe these studies may help inform the design of a development plan for TARA-002 in LMs. 9 TARA-002 Regulatory Interactions In July 2020, the FDA granted Rare Pediatric Disease designation for TARA-002 for the treatment of LMs. The FDA grants Rare Pediatric Disease designation for serious diseases that primarily affect children ages 18 years or younger and fewer than 200,000 persons in the United States. Under the FDA’s Rare Pediatric Disease Priority Review Voucher program, a sponsor who receives an approval of a NDA or BLA for a product for the prevention or treatment of a rare pediatric disease may be eligible for a voucher, which can be redeemed to obtain priority review for any subsequent marketing application or may be sold or transferred. The robust dataset for OK-432 in LMs has informed our development of TARA-002. At the FDA’s request, we submitted the full CSR of the randomized Phase 2 clinical trial of OK-432 in LMs led by the University of Iowa to our open IND with the Vaccines Division. We received feedback from the Vaccines Division on the protocol for our proposed Phase 2 clinical trial evaluating TARA-002 in LMs. In the second half of 2023 we expect to initiate this Phase 2 single arm, open-label clinical trial to evaluate the safety and efficacy of TARA-002 in pediatric patients with macrocystic and mixed-cystic LMs. The trial design includes a safety lead-in phase followed by an expansion phase. We are conducting trial preparation activities and have identified multiple trial sites. Manufacturing TARA-002 is manufactured using an equivalent, but modernized, proprietary manufacturing process as is used to produce OK-432 by Chugai Pharmaceutical. Starting with a master cell line propagated by us but utilizing the same genetically distinct strain of Streptococcus pyogenes (A group, type 3) Su strain as OK-432. We have contracted a CDMO to manufacture TARA-002. IV Choline Chloride for the treatment of Intestinal Failure Associated Liver Disease IV Choline Chloride is an IV substrate replacement therapy initially in development for patients receiving PN who have IFALD. Choline is a known important substrate for phospholipids that are critical for healthy liver function. Because patients receiving PN cannot sufficiently absorb adequate levels of choline and no available PN components contain sufficient amounts of choline to correct this deficit, they often experience a prolonged progression to hepatic failure and death, with the only known intervention being a dual small bowel / liver transplant. If approved, IV Choline Chloride would be the first approved therapy for IFALD. It has been granted ODD by the FDA for the treatment of IFALD and the prevention of choline deficiency in PN patients. We are currently undertaking a multinational prevalence study to enhance understanding of the PN patient population. We expect to complete the prospective part of the study in mid-2023. We have entered into a license agreement with Dr. Alan Buchman for exclusive rights to the IND, ODD and other regulatory assets related to IV Choline Chloride, as well as exclusive rights to the data from previously conducted Phase 1 and Phase 2 clinical trials led by Dr. Buchman. The results of a randomized, controlled, Phase 2 clinical trial demonstrated that treatment with IV Choline Chloride resulted in normalization of plasma-free choline concentrations, improvement of hepatic steatosis, and statistically significant improvement in cholestasis in patients dependent on PN. We had an end of Phase 2 meeting with the FDA in November 2018 and received the FDA’s feedback on the design of studies necessary to complete the registration package for IV Choline Chloride for the treatment of IFALD, including a Phase 1 pharmacokinetic study and a Phase 3 trial. We intend to use the results of our multinational prevalence study of the PN patient population to inform our strategy for IV Choline Chloride. 10 Disease Overview IFALD is a rare hepatic/metabolic disease. IFALD, which occurs in patients dependent upon PN, is characterized by choline deficiency, hepatic steatosis, cholestasis, and rapid progression of liver disease through to hepatic failure and death, in the absence of intestine-liver transplant. IFALD carries a relatively poor prognosis, with a 15-34% death rate within one to four years. When IFALD presents in children, mortality is even higher, with studies reporting death rates of 23-40% within 18 months. A patient is considered to have IFALD if she/he: ● is dependent on PN for more than six months (e.g., has chronic intestinal failure); ● has evidence of steatosis, determined by imaging techniques or histologic assessments; ● has evidence of cholestasis (e.g., elevated alkaline phosphatase, or ALP, elevated bilirubin and/or histology); and ● may have evidence of ongoing, progressive liver injury on the basis of multiple abnormal liver function tests, in conjunction with findings of fibrosis, cirrhosis, and/or end-stage liver disease. Many patients receiving PN are entirely dependent on PN for their nutritional needs. PN delivers nearly all the macro and micro-nutrients necessary for survival in their patients, with the notable exception of choline. Consequently, patients dependent on PN support have been shown to be choline deficient. Patients dependent upon PN are unable to synthesize sufficient levels of choline and malabsorption limits the bioavailability of choline chloride from the PN diet. The American Society for Parenteral and Enteral Nutrition and the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics’ Dietitians in Nutrition Support both recommend that choline be developed and routinely included in PN products; however, there are currently no FDA-approved choline chloride PN products. Dependence on PN and resulting choline deficiency often leads to IFALD, which is the most common adverse outcome in chronic PN adult patients that is associated with death. Low free choline plasma concentrations are associated with alanine aminotransferase, or ALT, aspartate aminotransferase, or AST, and ALP elevations as well as steatosis (fatty liver) and cholestasis (when bile from the liver stops or slows), all indicators of ongoing liver damage. Clinical Development In a Phase 2 randomized, double-blind, controlled 24-week clinical trial, patients (n=15) receiving nightly PN for > 85% of their nutritional needs (for at least 12 weeks prior to entry) were randomized to receive via IV infusion (10-12 hours) their usual PN with placebo (n = 8), or PN to which 2g IV Choline Chloride was added (n = 7). In the IV Choline Chloride group, mean choline levels were within or greater than the estimated normal range (i.e., 6.7 to 26.9 nmol/mL) throughout the 24-week trial and quickly returned to baseline levels when treatment was discontinued. Steatosis: Upon conversion of the quantification of computed tomography, or CT, values to magnetic resonance imaging proton density fat fraction, or MRI-PDFF, significant differences in the least square, or LS, mean change from baseline in estimated MRI-PDFF were observed in the IV Choline Chloride group in comparison to placebo group at Week 4 through Week 24, demonstrating a clinically meaningful and statistically significant reduction in steatosis. When LS mean percent changes from baseline in MRI-PDFF were compared between treatment groups, significant differences in LS mean changes (range, 31.7% to 53.6%) were observed from Weeks 4 to 24 with p-values of 0.0009 to 0.0297 favoring the IV Choline Chloride group. 11 Figure 3. Liver CT Images: Before and After Treatment with IV Choline Chloride Alkaline Phosphatase: At baseline, LS mean ALP concentration was 239.3 ± 118.93 in the IV Choline Chloride group and 148.1 ± 100.2 in the placebo group. The mixed model for repeated measures, or MMRM, analyses demonstrated statistically significant decreases in ALP concentrations at Week 12 (p = 0.008), Week 16 (p = 0.005), Week 20 (p = 0.007), and Week 24 (p = 0.005) for the IV Choline Chloride group, demonstrating a reduction in cholestasis. A trend towards significance was observed at Week 4 (p = 0.076) and Week 6 (p = 0.056). At Week 34, 10 weeks after discontinuation of IV Choline Chloride treatment, LS mean change from baseline in ALP concentrations still demonstrated statistically significant decreases (p = 0.002), demonstrating a significant improvement in cholestasis with treatment with IV Choline Chloride (Figure 4). In the subgroup of subjects with ALP concentration > 1.5x upper limit of normal (ULN) at baseline, (n=7), mean values at baseline were comparable between the IV Choline Chloride and placebo groups (294.20 ± 87.947 versus 277.00 ± 128.693, respectively). In the sub-group analysis, improvement in ALP was consistent and substantial, with 20-30% improvement over 12-24 weeks of treatment. Statistical significance was observed at 12, 16, and 20 weeks. In the description of the trials above and elsewhere in this Annual Report on Form 10-K, “n” represents the number of patients in a particular group and “p” or “p-values” represent the probability that random chance caused the result (e.g., a p-value of 0.001 means that there is a 0.1% probability that the difference between the placebo group and the treatment group is purely due to random chance). A p-value of less than or equal to 0.05 is a commonly used criterion for statistical significance, and may be supportive of a finding of efficacy by regulatory authorities. 12 Figure 4. Improvement in Cholestasis 1 : All Patients 1 Protara Therapeutics re-analysis of patient CRF’s, data on file. * MMRM method used for imputation. ǂ A placebo subject was excluded from all analyses due to likely IV contrast-induced imaging abnormalities, confirmed by independent radiologist in subsequent re-analysis. Preclinical Development Table 1. Preclinical Studies Conducted by us for IV Choline Chloride Study Type Brief Description In vitro protein binding Evaluation of Protein Binding by Choline Chloride in Plasma Using Rapid Equilibrium Dialysis In vitro cardiac ion channel study In Vitro Assessment of the Effect of Choline on Currents Mediated by hERG, Cav1.2, and Peak and Late Nav1.5 Channels Expressed in Human Embryonic Kidney (HEK) Cells In vitro drug-drug interaction Evaluation of Transporter Inhibition by Choline Chloride in Transporter-Transfected HEK293 Cells Evaluation of OCT2, MATE1 and MATE2-K Inhibition by Choline Chloride in Transporter-Transfected HEK293 Cells Evaluation of Transporter Inhibition by Choline Chloride in Caco-2 Cells Evaluation of Time Dependent Cytochrome P450 Inhibition (IC50 Shift) by Choline Chloride in Human Liver Microsomes Evaluation of Direct Cytochrome P450 Inhibition by Choline Chloride in Human Liver Microsomes Evaluation of Cytochrome P450 Induction by Choline Chloride in Human Hepatocytes Evaluation of Transporter Inhibition by Choline Chloride in Caco-2 Cells Evaluating of Cytochrome P450 2C8, 2C9, and 2C19 mRNA Induction by Choline Chloride in Human Hepatocytes In vitro BSEP inhibition Assessment of Choline as an Inhibitor of Human BSEP Mediated Transport Assessment of Choline as a Substrate of Human BSEP Mediated Transport Nonclinical pharmacology studies Non-GLP Pilot Single Dose, Escalating Dose Tolerance Study of Choline by Intravenous Infusion in Male Beagle Dogs GLP Single-dose IV Cardiovascular Study in Surgically Instrumented Male Dogs Monitored by Telemetry GLP Combined Single-dose IV Neurobehavioral and Respiratory Study 13 Regulatory Interactions We have received feedback from the FDA on a number of key aspects of the overall clinical program necessary for registration, including a Phase 1 pharmacokinetic study and a Phase 3 clinical trial. We completed a retrospective, observational study of patients dependent on PN for 6 or more months. The objective of the study was to understand the incidence of cholestasis, a hallmark pathology of IFALD in this patient population by measuring serum alkaline phosphatase (ALP) levels greater than 1.5 times the upper limit of normal ULN as a key marker of cholestasis. Results of the study showed: 31% of all patients, irrespective of baseline levels, presented with ALP levels greater than 1.5 times the ULN at any given time during 6 to 36 months. In addition, approximately 28% of all patients had persistent ALP elevations greater than 1.5 times the ULN at 36 months. At baseline, approximately 23% of patients presented with ALP levels greater than 1.5 times the ULN with approximately 76% presenting with greater than 1.5 times the ULN at any given time during 6 to 36 months and approximately 59% with persistent ALP elevations greater than 1.5 times the ULN at 36 months. While medical management demonstrated some improvement in ALP levels, it was not sufficient for managing ALP levels over the long term in patients on PN. Results support further exploration in patient population to determine rates of choline deficiency and steatosis. We have initiated a prospective observational study to further characterize the prevalence of choline deficiency, as well as cholestasis and steatosis. We plan to use information from this prospective study to determine the appropriate next steps for the development program. Manufacturing Through our CDMO, we have manufactured sufficient amounts of cGMP drug substance and drug product to initiate the planned clinical trials. Scale up for commercial demand, if and when applicable, will commence when appropriate. Our end-to-end manufacturing of IV Choline Chloride is conducted in the United States by a cGMP-compliant CDMO. However, due to current macroeconomic factors, such as rising inflation and supply chain shortages, scaling up may be more difficult than originally anticipated. Collaborations and License Agreements Chugai Agreement On June 17, 2019, we entered into an agreement, or the Chugai Agreement, with Chugai Pharmaceutical, a company organized and existing under the laws of Japan. Chugai Pharmaceutical has developed and commercialized a therapeutic product, OK-432 (or Existing Product), in Japan and Taiwan, or the Chugai Territory and owns and controls certain materials and documents related to the Existing Product (or the Chugai Materials). Pursuant to the Chugai Agreement, Chugai Pharmaceutical has provided us with certain materials and documents relating to the Existing Product and has provided certain technical services to us for our development and commercialization in territories other than the Chugai Territory, or the Protara Territory of a new therapeutic product, or the New Product or TARA-002 comparable to the Existing Product beginning on the effective date of the Chugai Agreement and ending on June 30, 2020, or any other date to be agreed to by the parties, or the Chugai Service Period. Under the Chugai Agreement, Chugai Pharmaceutical will exclusively provide the Existing Product and Chugai Materials to us and will not provide the Existing Product or Chugai Materials to any third parties during the Chugai Service Period, other than for medical, compassionate use and/or non-commercial research purposes. Additionally, beginning on the effective date of the Chugai Agreement and ending on the fifth anniversary of such date or upon the termination of the Chugai Agreement, whichever comes earlier, Chugai Pharmaceutical will not provide Chugai Materials or technical support to any third-party for the purpose of development and commercialization in the Protara Territory of a therapeutic product comparable to the Existing Product. We are responsible, at our sole cost and expense, for the development and commercialization of the New Product in the Protara Territory. On July 14, 2020, we and Chugai Pharmaceutical entered into an amendment of the Chugai Agreement, or the Chugai Amendment, with an effective date as of June 30, 2020. The Chugai Amendment extends the date through which Chugai will exclusively provide the Existing Product and materials to us from June 30, 2020 to June 30, 2021, extends the date through which Chugai will not provide materials or technical support to any third-party for the purpose of development and commercialization in a given area from the fifth anniversary to the eleventh anniversary of the original effective date (extended to June 17, 2030), and provides for further such extensions on the occurrence of certain events and milestones. The Chugai Amendment also provides that, in addition to the designated fee payable upon the initial indication approval in the Chugai Agreement described below, we will pay Chugai a designated fee in the low, single digit millions for each additional indication approval. 14 As consideration for Chugai Pharmaceutical’s performance under the Chugai Agreement, we agreed to pay Chugai Pharmaceutical a payment in the low, single-digit millions, which will be made in two installments with an initial payment made in July 2020, and the remaining majority of the total amount will be payable upon FDA approval of the New Product. We granted Chugai Pharmaceutical a right of first refusal on terms to be negotiated between the parties for a license related to the New Product-relevant information, data and documentation and inventions to develop and commercialize the New Product in the Chugai Territory. We will be responsible for manufacturing and supplying or causing our CDMO to manufacture and supply the New Product to Chugai Pharmaceutical. The Chugai Agreement will remain in full force and effect until the first anniversary of the date of FDA approval of the New Product, unless terminated sooner, or the Chugai Term. Following the Chugai Service Period and during the Chugai Term, Chugai Pharmaceutical may terminate the Chugai Agreement, in whole or in part, without cause, by providing us 90 days prior written notice. Following such termination, we would maintain exclusive access to Chugai Materials, subject to the termination clauses outlined below. We may terminate the Chugai Agreement, in whole only, by providing Chugai Pharmaceutical 90 days’ prior written notice if (i) we decide to discontinue the New Product development; (ii) we decide that the FDA’s requirements for the New Product are not likely to be met; or (iii) the FDA identifies a safety issue regarding the New Product. In addition, either party may terminate the Chugai Agreement, in whole or in part, in the event that the other party materially breaches the Chugai Agreement and fails to cure the breach within 30 days of written notice. Either party may terminate the Chugai Agreement in its entirety immediately upon notice to the other party if such other party: (i) is dissolved or liquidated or takes any corporate action for such purpose; (ii) becomes insolvent or is generally unable to pay, or fails to pay, its debts as they become due; (iii) files or has filed against it a petition for voluntary or involuntary bankruptcy or otherwise becomes subject to any proceeding under any domestic or foreign bankruptcy or insolvency laws; (iv) makes or seeks to make a general assignment for the benefit of creditors; or (v) applies for or has a receiver, trustee, custodian or similar agent appointed by order of any court to take charge of or sell any material portion of its property or business. In the event that we undergo a change of control, Chugai Pharmaceutical may terminate the Chugai Agreement upon 90 days’ written notice to us, absent a written pledge by the new controlling party of its agreement to fulfill and undertake all obligations of ours and to be bound by the Chugai Agreement. Sponsored Research and License Agreement On November 28, 2018, we entered into a sponsored research and license agreement, or the Research Agreement, with The University of Iowa, or the University, pursuant to which the University will provide access to certain program data related to Chugai Pharmaceutical’s OK-432 and will assist us in conducting certain clinical studies. As consideration for the University’s performance under the Research Agreement, we will pay the University $30,000 per year in funding for the project, taking into consideration the time spent by University employees required for the Project. The parties also agree to discuss in good faith potential additional funding required for completion of the project pursuant to the Research Agreement as applicable and necessary. In addition, within 45 days of approval of the TARA-002 BLA by the FDA, we will pay a one-time approval milestone to the University, the amount of which depends on the usefulness of the program data in TARA-002’s BLA filing, and the milestone amount will range from $0 to $1 million. We will also be responsible for certain tiered royalties on annual net sales of products for the indication, which royalty rates are in the low single digit percentages. These royalty rates are also subject to a reduction in the event that regulatory authorities determine that the program data is not sufficient for regulatory approval on its own and additional pediatric efficacy and safety clinical studies are required. In the event that the annual net sales surpass certain dollar amount thresholds, we will need to make certain additional milestone payments following the close of the calendar quarter in which each milestone is reached, with the payments ranging from $62,500 to $125,000. 15 We may terminate the Research Agreement upon 30 days’ prior written notice to the University. Either party may terminate the project under the Research Agreement and all commitments and obligations with respect thereto upon 30 days’ prior written notice to the other party. In the event of any termination of the project under the Research Agreement by the University, (a) the University agrees to complete certain phases of the project and (b) we will continue to provide annual funding until the completion of the second phase of the project. Upon termination of the project by us, the Agreement will terminate and we will reassign to the University the IND for LMs. Choline License Agreement On September 27, 2017, we entered into a choline license agreement, or the Choline Agreement, with Alan L. Buchman, M.D., pursuant to which Dr. Buchman granted us an exclusive, worldwide, non-transferable license in and to certain licensed orphan designations, a certain licensed IND, certain existing study data and certain licensed know-how to develop, make, use, sell, offer for sale and import the licensed product during the term of the Choline Agreement. We are solely responsible for all fees and expenses under the Choline Agreement, including all due diligence obligations, regulatory authority fees, attorney fees and consulting fees. During the term of the Choline Agreement, Dr. Buchman may not work with any third parties on any product competing with the licensed product. In consideration for the rights and licenses granted under the Agreement, we made an initial upfront payment of $50,000 to Dr. Buchman. Certain milestone and royalty payments may also be payable to Dr. Buchman. Pursuant to the Choline Agreement, we paid Dr. Buchman $50,000 in October 2019 because we had not received at least $5 million in working capital from any source or in any manner as of October 15, 2019. We then paid Dr. Buchman a $550,000 milestone in January 2020 following our receipt of at least $5 million in working capital. Regardless of whether development or commercialization is undertaken by us under the Choline Agreement, commencing in November 2022 and during the term of the Choline Agreement, we will pay Dr. Buchman a minimum annual royalty that ranges from $25,000 to $75,000. We owe Dr. Buchman sales royalties based on aggregate net sales of IV Choline Chloride in each calendar quarter, with the royalty rates ranging from 5.0% to 10.5% of net sales. In the event of development or commercialization activity by any sublicensees, we also agreed to pay Dr. Buchman a royalty in the mid-single digit percentage of (i) net cash receipts, after payment of taxes, received by us from sublicensees for their sales of licensed products and (ii) any other consideration received by us from such sublicensees; in each case, including a fair monetary value for any transaction that is not a bona fide arms-length transaction or that is for consideration other than monetary. Further, in the event of a sale or transfer of a priority review voucher regarding the license product, regardless of whether any development or commercialization activity is undertaken by us or our sublicensees, we agreed to pay Dr. Buchman a milestone payment representing the mid-single digit percentage of (i) net cash receipts, after payment of taxes and (ii) any other consideration; in each case, received by us, our affiliates, or our sublicensees, including a fair monetary value for any transaction that is not a bona fide arms-length transaction or that is for consideration other than monetary. We will also pay Dr. Buchman up to $775,000 in additional milestone payments upon the achievement of various regulatory approval milestones. 16 The Choline Agreement will remain in full force and effect until the last sale of the licensed product under the Choline Agreement. After we received the FDA’s written minutes from the initial FDA meeting concerning the development of the first licensed product for one or more of the licensed indications, we paid an additional payment of $100,000 to Dr. Buchman and elected not terminate the Choline Agreement at that time. The Choline Agreement may be terminated by Dr. Buchman if, following regulatory approval of a licensed product, we have not made our first sale of a licensed product within such country within a specified time period. We may terminate the Choline Agreement for convenience upon 90 days’ prior written notice to Dr. Buchman. Dr. Buchman may terminate the Choline Agreement for non-payment of any payment due that has not been cured. Either party may terminate the Choline Agreement if the other party is in material breach and has not cured such breach within 60 days’ notice. In addition, Dr. Buchman may terminate the Choline Agreement upon 60 days’ prior written notice if (a) we cease or threaten to cease to carry on our business; (b) a petition or resolution for the making of an administration order or for the bankruptcy, winding-up or dissolution of us is presented or passed; (c) we file a voluntary petition in bankruptcy or insolvency; (d) a receiver or administrator takes possession of our assets or (e) any similar procedure is commenced against us in the United States. License Agreement On December 22, 2017, we entered into a license agreement, or the License Agreement, with The Feinstein Institute for Medical Research, a not-for-profit corporation organized and existing under the laws of New York, or the Institute. The Institute owns, by assignment, a U.S. patent related to the treatment of fatty liver disease in humans. Pursuant to the License Agreement, the Institute granted us an exclusive, worldwide license, with the right to grant sublicenses to non-affiliate third parties, to develop, make, have made, use, sell, offer for sale and import certain products for use in the field of fatty liver disease in humans receiving total parenteral nutrition, by administering, as monotherapy, a pharmaceutical composition comprising intravenous choline, wherein the fatty liver disease is selected from IFALD, non-alcoholic fatty liver, non-alcoholic steatohepatitis, or NASH, NASH-associated liver fibrosis, or non-alcoholic cirrhosis. Notwithstanding the exclusive rights granted to us, the Institute will retain the right to make, use and practice such patents in its own laboratories solely for non-commercial scientific purposes and for continued non-commercial research. As consideration for the license grant, we agreed to pay the Institute tiered royalties of between 1.0% and 1.5% of all net sales. In addition, we agreed to pay the Institute a low double digit percentage of net proceeds resulting from agreements entered into within two years from the effective date of the License Agreement and a mid-single digit percentage of net proceeds resulting from agreements entered into thereafter. We also agreed to make certain license maintenance payments of $15,000 beginning on the second anniversary of the effective date of the License Agreement and continuing upon every anniversary thereafter until the first commercial sale of a licensed product. Beginning on the first anniversary of the effective date of the License Agreement after the first commercial sale of a licensed product and every anniversary of the effective date of the License Agreement thereafter, we will pay the Institute $30,000 as a license maintenance fee. Such license maintenance fees are non-refundable but are creditable against future royalty payments due to the Institute during the 12-month period following each such anniversary. We agreed to make certain one-time milestone payments in the aggregate amount of $375,000 upon the achievement of certain regulatory approval milestones, of which $100,000 was paid on January 28, 2020 upon us having consummated the Private Placements. Unless terminated earlier, the License Agreement will expire upon the expiration of the last to expire patent under the License Agreement. We may terminate the License Agreement by giving the Institute 60 days’ prior notice. Either party may terminate the License Agreement in the event of a default or breach by the other party that has not been cured within 60 days of such notice. If we (i) make an assignment for the benefit of creditors or if proceedings for a voluntary bankruptcy are instituted on our behalf; (ii) are declared bankrupt or insolvent or (iii) are convicted of a felony relating to the manufacture, use or sale of the licensed products or a felony relating to moral turpitude, the Institute may terminate the License Agreement. 17 Intellectual Property Our intellectual property is critical to our business and we strive to protect it, including by obtaining and maintaining patent protection in the U.S. and internationally for our product candidates, novel biological discoveries, epitopes, new therapeutic approaches and potential indications, and other inventions that are important to our business. Throughout the development of our product candidates, we will seek to identify additional means of obtaining patent protection that would potentially enhance commercial success. We also rely upon trade secrets, know-how, continuing technological innovation and in-licensing opportunities to develop and maintain our proprietary position. The patent positions of biotechnology companies like us are generally uncertain and involve complex legal, scientific and factual questions. We recognize that the ability to obtain patent protection and the degree of such protection depends on a number of factors, including the extent of the prior art, the novelty and non-obviousness of the invention, and the ability to satisfy the enablement requirement of the patent laws. In addition, the coverage claimed in a patent application can be significantly reduced before the patent is issued, and its scope can be reinterpreted after issuance. Consequently, we may not obtain or maintain adequate patent protection for any of our product candidates. Any patents that we hold may be challenged, circumvented or invalidated by third parties. Our commercial success will also depend in part on not infringing the proprietary rights of third parties. In addition, we have licensed rights under proprietary technologies of third parties to develop, manufacture and commercialize specific aspects of our products and services. It is uncertain whether the issuance of any third-party patent would require us to alter our development or commercial strategies, alter our processes, obtain licenses or cease certain activities. The expiration of patents or patent applications licensed from third parties or our breach of any license agreements or failure to obtain a license to proprietary rights that it may require to develop or commercialize our future technology may have a material adverse impact on it. If third parties prepare and file patent applications in the United States that also claim technology to which we have rights, we may have to participate in interference proceedings in the USPTO, to determine priority of invention. For a more comprehensive discussion of the risks related to our intellectual property, please see “ Risk Factors—Risks Related to Our Intellectual Property. ” TARA-002: TARA-002 is a genetically distinct Su strain of Streptococcus pyogenes (group A, type 3). TARA-002 is produced through a proprietary manufacturing process. We believe a significant barrier to entry exists, as we believe only Chugai Pharmaceutical and we have the specific strain and possess the know-how to manufacture the product. We anticipate that, if approved by the FDA, TARA-002 will be protected by 12 years of biologic exclusivity. IV Choline Chloride: With respect to IV Choline Chloride, we have acquired an exclusive, worldwide license to U.S. Patent 8,865,641 B2 from the Feinstein Institute for Medical Research providing protection in the United States until 2035. The patent applies to a method of treating a fatty liver disease in a subject. In particular, the method comprises administering to the subject an effective amount of a cholinergic pathway stimulating agent, wherein the fatty liver disease is selected from non-alcoholic fatty liver, alcoholic fatty liver, NASH, alcoholic steatohepatitis, or ASH, NASH-associated liver fibrosis, ASH-associated liver fibrosis, non-alcoholic cirrhosis and alcoholic cirrhosis. In addition, in April 2022, the USPTO issued to us Patent No. US 11,311,503 claiming a sterile aqueous choline salt composition with a term expiring in 2041. We would expect to list such patent in the FDA’s Orange Book List of Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations if IV Choline Chloride is approved by the FDA for the treatment of IFALD. 18 The term of individual patents depends upon the legal term of the patents in the countries in which they are obtained. In most countries in which we may file, the patent term is 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application related to the patent. A U.S. patent also may be accorded a patent term adjustment under certain circumstances to compensate for delays in obtaining the patent from the USPTO. In some instances, such a patent term adjustment may result in a U.S. patent term extending beyond 20 years from the earliest date of filing a non-provisional patent application related to the U.S. patent. In addition, in the United States, the term of a U.S. patent that covers an FDA-approved drug may also be eligible for patent term extension, which permits patent term restoration as compensation for the patent term lost during the FDA regulatory review process. The Hatch-Waxman Act permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the expiration of the patent. The length of the patent term extension is related to the length of time the drug is under regulatory review. Patent term extension cannot extend the remaining term of a patent beyond a total of 14 years from the date of product approval and only one patent applicable to an approved drug may be extended. Similar provisions are available in Europe and other foreign jurisdictions to extend the term of a patent that covers an approved drug. In the future, if and when our products receive FDA approval, we expect to apply for patent term extensions on patents covering certain of those products, when applicable. We also rely on trade secrets relating to product candidates and seek to protect and maintain the confidentiality of proprietary information to protect aspects of our business that are not amenable to, or that we do not consider appropriate for, patent protection. Although we take steps to protect our proprietary information and trade secrets, including through contractual means with our employees and consultants, third parties may independently develop substantially equivalent proprietary information and techniques or otherwise gain access to our trade secrets, including through breaches of such agreements with our employees and consultants. Thus, we may not be able to meaningfully protect our trade secrets. It is our policy to require our employees, consultants, outside scientific partners, sponsored researchers and other advisors to execute confidentiality agreements upon the commencement of employment or consulting relationships with us. These agreements provide that all confidential information concerning our business or financial affairs developed or made known to the individual during the course of the individual’s relationship with us is to be kept confidential and not disclosed to third parties except in specific circumstances. Our agreements with employees also provide that all inventions conceived by the employee in the course of employment with us or from the employee’s use of our confidential information are our exclusive property. Manufacturing We rely on CDMOs to produce our drug candidates in accordance with cGMP as well as regulations for use in clinical trials and for commercial product. The manufacture of pharmaceuticals is subject to extensive cGMP regulations, which impose various procedural and documentation requirements and govern all areas of record keeping, production processes and controls, personnel and quality control. The CDMOs that we partner with have the capability to produce clinical supply required for clinical trials, as well as support commercial scale-up activities for both products. We manufacture TARA-002 using an equivalent, but modernized, proprietary manufacturing process as is used to produce OK-432 by Chugai Pharmaceutical, starting with a master cell line propagated by us but utilizing the same genetically distinct strain of Streptococcus pyogenes (A group, type 3) Su strain as OK-432. We have contracted a CDMO to manufacture TARA-002. Both TARA-002 and IV Choline Chloride are or will be manufactured in the United States. The starting materials for TARA-002 were provided to us pursuant to an agreement with Chugai Pharmaceutical. The regulatory starting materials for IV Choline Chloride are available commercially. 19 Sales and Marketing We plan to become a fully-integrated commercial biopharmaceutical company pursuing our mission of supporting and improving the lives of patients suffering from cancer and rare diseases. If approved by the FDA, we plan to commercialize both of our current product candidates in the United States first and then in other geographies. As we advance TARA-002 and IV Choline Chloride through our respective clinical development programs, we plan to grow our commercial organization in support of anticipated product launches. Competition The process for commercialization of new drugs is very competitive, and we could potentially face worldwide competition from other pharmaceutical companies, biotechnology companies and ultimately generic or biosimilar products. Our potential competitors may develop or market therapies that are available sooner, more clinically effective, safer or less expensive than any therapeutic products we develop. Numerous companies are engaged in the development, patenting, manufacturing and marketing of healthcare products competitive with those that we are developing. With respect to our lead product candidate, TARA-002, for the treatment of NMIBC and LMs, the active ingredient in TARA-002 is a genetically distinct strain of Streptococcus pyogenes (group A, type 3) Su strain. TARA-002 is produced through a proprietary manufacturing process. We anticipate that, if approved by the FDA, TARA-002 will be protected by 12 years of biologic exclusivity. In addition, based on the prevalence of the disease, TARA-002 is likely to have seven years of concurrent Orphan Drug Designation exclusivity for the treatment of LMs. There are no approved pharmacotherapies currently available for the treatment of LMs and the current treatment options include a high-risk surgical procedure and off-label use of sclerosants, including doxycycline, bleomycin, ethanol and sodium tetradecyl sulfate. There are a number of drug development companies and academic researchers exploring oral and topical formulations of various agents for the treatment of LMs including macrolides, phosphodiesterase inhibitors, and calcineurin/mTOR inhibitors. These are in early development. TARA-002, if approved for the treatment of NMIBC, would be subject to competition from existing treatment methods of surgery, chemotherapy and immunomodulatory therapy. For example, the current standard of care for NMIBC includes intravesical BCG TICE (manufactured by Merck & Co., Inc.). Other products approved for the treatment of NMIBC include Merck & Co., Inc.’s Keytruda, Endo International plc’s Valstar and Ferring B.V.’s Adstiladrin. Additional product candidates in development include Japanese BCG Laboratory’s BCG Tokyo, Pfizer Inc.’s Sasanlimab in combination with BCG, ImmunityBio, Inc.’s VesAnktiva in combination with BCG, CG Oncology Inc.’s CG0070, Sesen Bio, Inc.’s Vicineum, enGene Inc.’s, EG-70, Seagen Inc.’s PADCEV, Janssen’s TAR200 combined with gemcitabine plus or minus Cetrelimab, Urogen Pharma Ltd.’s Jelmyto,and Auro BioSciences, Inc.’s Aura-0011. Additional pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies with product candidates in development for the treatment of NMIBC include but may not be limited to Verity Pharmaceuticals, Inc., AstraZeneca PLC, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, Roche Group, Asieris Pharmaceuticals, BeiGene, Ltd, NanOlogy, LLC, Linton Pharm Co., Ltd., Lindis Biotech GmbH, Theralase Technologies Inc., Taizhou Hanzhong biomedical co. Ltd., Shionogi & Co., Ltd., Rapamycin Holdings, Inc., Vaxiion Therapeutics Inc., Incyte Corporation, LiPac Oncology, Inc., Anika Therapeutics Inc., Surge Pharmaceuticals Pvt. Ltd., and Istari Oncology, Inc. There are no treatments currently available for IFALD. With respect to IV Choline Chloride for the treatment of IFALD, IV Choline Chloride is the only sterile injectable form of choline chloride that can be combined with parenteral nutrition. Further, if approved, IV Choline Chloride will be protected by Orphan Drug Designation exclusivity for seven years. Government Regulation and Product Approval The FDA and other regulatory authorities at federal, state, and local levels, as well as in foreign countries, extensively regulate, among other things, the research, development, testing, manufacture, quality control, import, export, safety, effectiveness, labeling, packaging, storage, distribution, record keeping, approval, advertising, promotion, marketing, post-approval monitoring, and post-approval reporting of drugs and biologics such as those we are developing. We, along with third-party contractors, will be required to navigate the various preclinical, clinical and commercial approval requirements of the governing regulatory agencies of the countries in which we wish to conduct studies or seek approval or licensure of our product candidates. 20 In the United States, the FDA regulates drugs under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA and biologics additionally under the Public Health Services Act, or PHSA, as well as their respective implementing regulations. The process required by the FDA before biopharmaceutical product candidates may be marketed in the United States generally involves the following: ● completion of preclinical laboratory tests and animal studies performed in accordance with the FDA’s current Good Laboratory Practices, or cGLP regulations; ● submission to the FDA of an IND, which must become effective before clinical trials may begin and must be updated annually or when significant changes are made; ● approval by an independent Institutional Review Board, or IRB, or ethics committee at each clinical site before the trial is commenced; ● performance of adequate and well-controlled human clinical trials to establish the safety and efficacy of a product candidate and the safety, purity and potency of the proposed biologic product candidate for its intended purpose; ● preparation of and submission to the FDA of an NDA or BLA after completion of all pivotal clinical trials that includes substantial evidence of safety, purity and potency or efficacy from results of nonclinical testing and clinical trials; ● a determination by the FDA within 60 days of its receipt of an NDA or BLA to accept the application for review; ● satisfactory completion of an FDA Advisory Committee review, if applicable; ● satisfactory completion of an FDA pre-approval inspection of the manufacturing facility or facilities at which the proposed product is produced to assess compliance with cGMP, and of selected clinical investigation sites to assess compliance with current Good Clinical Practices, or cGCP; and ● FDA review and approval, or licensure, of the NDA or BLA to permit commercial marketing of the product for particular indications for use in the United States. Preclinical and Clinical Development Prior to beginning the first clinical trial with a product candidate, we must submit an IND to the FDA. An IND is a request for authorization from the FDA to administer an investigational new drug product to humans. The central focus of an IND submission is on the general investigational plan and the protocol(s) for clinical trials. The IND also includes results of animal and in vitro studies assessing the toxicology, pharmacokinetics, pharmacology, and pharmacodynamic characteristics of the product candidate; chemistry, manufacturing, and controls information; and any available human data or literature to support the use of the investigational product. An IND must become effective before human clinical trials may begin. The IND automatically becomes effective 30 days after receipt by the FDA, unless the FDA, within the 30-day time period, raises safety concerns or questions about the proposed clinical trial. In such a case, the IND may be placed on clinical hold and the IND sponsor and the FDA must resolve any outstanding concerns or questions before the clinical trial can begin. Submission of an IND therefore may or may not result in FDA authorization to begin a clinical trial. 21 Clinical trials involve the administration of the investigational product to human subjects under the supervision of qualified investigators in accordance with GCPs, 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 trial, the parameters to be used in monitoring safety and the effectiveness criteria to be evaluated. A separate submission to the existing IND must be made for each successive clinical trial conducted during product development and for any subsequent protocol amendments. Furthermore, an independent IRB for each site proposing to conduct the clinical trial must review and approve the plan for any clinical trial and its informed consent form before the clinical trial begins at that site, and must monitor the trial until completed. Regulatory authorities, the IRB or the sponsor may suspend a clinical trial at any time on various grounds, including a finding that the subjects are being exposed to an unacceptable health risk or that the trial is unlikely to meet its stated objectives. Some studies also include oversight by an independent group of qualified experts organized by the clinical trial sponsor, known as a data safety monitoring board, which provides authorization for whether or not a trial may move forward at designated check points based on access to certain data from the trial and may halt the clinical trial if it determines that there is an unacceptable safety risk for subjects or other grounds, such as no demonstration of efficacy. There are also requirements governing the reporting of ongoing clinical trials and clinical trial results to public registries. Human clinical trials are typically conducted in three sequential phases that may overlap. ● Phase 1—The investigational product is initially introduced into healthy human subjects or patients with the target disease or condition. These trials are designed to test the safety, dosage tolerance, absorption, metabolism, distribution and elimination of the investigational product in humans, the side effects associated with increasing doses, and, if possible, to gain early evidence on effectiveness. ● Phase 2—The investigational product is administered to a limited patient population with a specified disease or condition to evaluate the preliminary efficacy, optimal dosages and dosing schedule and to identify possible adverse side effects and safety risks. Multiple Phase 2 clinical trials may be conducted to obtain information prior to beginning larger and more expensive Phase 3 clinical trials. ● Phase 3—The investigational product is administered to an expanded patient population to further evaluate dosage, to provide statistically significant evidence of clinical efficacy and to further test for safety, generally at multiple geographically dispersed clinical trial sites. These clinical trials are intended to establish the overall risk/benefit ratio of the investigational product and to provide an adequate basis for product approval. In some cases, the FDA may require, or companies may voluntarily pursue, additional clinical trials after a product is approved to gain more information about the product. These so-called Phase 4 trials may be made a condition to approval of the NDA or BLA. Concurrent with clinical trials, companies may complete additional animal studies and develop additional information about the biological characteristics of the product candidate, and must finalize a process for manufacturing the product in commercial quantities in accordance with cGMP requirements. The manufacturing process must be capable of consistently producing quality batches of the product candidate and, among other things, must develop methods for testing the identity, strength, quality and purity of the final product, or for biologics, the safety, purity and potency. Additionally, appropriate packaging must be selected and tested and stability studies must be conducted to demonstrate that the product candidate does not undergo unacceptable deterioration over its shelf life. 22 Application Submission, Review and Approval Assuming successful completion of all required testing in accordance with all applicable regulatory requirements, the results of product development, nonclinical studies and clinical trials are submitted to the FDA as part of an NDA or BLA requesting approval to market the product for one or more indications. The NDA or BLA must include all relevant data available from pertinent preclinical and clinical trials, including negative or ambiguous results as well as positive findings, together with detailed information relating to the product’s chemistry, manufacturing, controls, and proposed labeling, among other things. The submission of an NDA or BLA requires payment of a substantial application user fee to the FDA, unless a waiver or exemption applies. Once an NDA or BLA has been submitted, the FDA’s goal is to review standard applications within ten months after it accepts the application for filing, or, if the application qualifies for priority review, six months after the FDA accepts the application for filing. In both standard and priority reviews, the review process is often significantly extended by FDA requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA reviews the application to determine, among other things, whether a product is safe, pure and potent and the facility in which it is manufactured, processed, packed, or held meets standards designed to assure the product’s continued safety, purity and potency. The FDA may convene an advisory committee to provide clinical insight on application review questions. Before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect the facility or facilities where the product is manufactured. The FDA will not approve an application unless it determines that the manufacturing processes and facilities are in compliance with cGMP requirements and adequate to assure consistent production of the product within required specifications. Additionally, before approving an NDA or BLA, the FDA will typically inspect one or more clinical sites to assure compliance with GCP. If the FDA determines that the application, manufacturing process or manufacturing facilities are not acceptable, it will outline the deficiencies in the submission and often will request additional testing or information. Notwithstanding the submission of any requested additional information, the FDA ultimately may decide that the application does not satisfy the regulatory criteria for approval. The FDA may issue an approval letter or a Complete Response letter. An approval letter authorizes commercial marketing of the product with specific prescribing information for specific indications. A Complete Response letter will describe all of the deficiencies that the FDA has identified in the NDA or BLA. In issuing the Complete Response letter, the FDA may recommend actions that the applicant might take to place the application in condition for approval, including requests for additional information or clarification. The FDA may delay or refuse approval of an application if applicable regulatory criteria are not satisfied, require additional testing or information and/or require post-marketing testing and surveillance to monitor safety or efficacy of a product. If regulatory approval of a product is granted, such approval will be granted for particular indications and may entail limitations on the indicated uses for which such product may be marketed. For example, the FDA may impose a Risk Evaluation and Mitigation Strategy, or REMS, to ensure the benefits of the product outweigh its risks. A REMS is a safety strategy to manage a known or potential serious risk associated with a product and to enable patients to have continued access to such medicines by managing their safe use, and 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. The FDA also may condition approval on, among other things, changes to proposed labeling or the development of adequate controls and specifications. Once approved, the FDA may withdraw the product approval if compliance with pre- and post-marketing requirements is not maintained or if problems occur after the product reaches the marketplace. The FDA may require one or more Phase 4 post-market trials and surveillance to further assess and monitor the product’s safety and effectiveness after commercialization, and may limit further marketing of the product based on the results of these post-marketing trials. 23 Orphan Drug Designation Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is a disease or condition that affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or more than 200,000 individuals in the United States for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making available in the United States a drug or biologic for this type of disease or condition will be recovered from sales in the United States for that drug or biologic. Orphan designation must be requested before submitting an NDA or BLA. After the FDA grants orphan designation, the generic identity of the therapeutic agent and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. The orphan drug designation does not convey any advantage in, or shorten the duration of, the regulatory review or approval process. If a product that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a full NDA or BLA, to market the same product for the same indication for seven years, except in limited circumstances, such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan drug exclusivity. Orphan exclusivity does not prevent FDA from approving a different drug or biologic for the same disease or condition, or the same drug or biologic for a different disease or condition. Among the other benefits of orphan drug designation are tax credits for certain research and a waiver of the BLA application fee. A designated orphan product may not receive orphan exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan designation. In addition, 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 quantities of the product to meet the needs of patients with the rare disease or condition. The FDA incentivizes the development of drugs and biologics that meet the definition of a “rare pediatric disease” defined to mean a serious or life-threatening disease in which the serious of life-threatening manifestations primarily affect individuals aged from birth to 18 years and the disease affects fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States or affects 200,000 or more in the United States and for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing and making in the United States a drug for such disease or condition will be received from sales in the United States of such drug. The sponsor of a product candidate for a rare pediatric disease may be eligible for a voucher that can be used to obtain a priority review for a subsequent human drug or biologic application after the date of approval of the rare pediatric disease drug product, referred to as a priority review voucher, or PRV. A rare pediatric disease designation does not guarantee that a sponsor will receive a PRV upon approval of its NDA or BLA. If a PRV is received, it may be sold or transferred an unlimited number of times. Congress has extended the PRV program until September 30, 2024, with the potential for PRVs to be granted until September 30, 2026. Post-Approval Requirements Any products manufactured or distributed pursuant to FDA approvals are subject to pervasive and continuing regulation by the FDA, including, among other things, requirements relating to quality control and quality assurance, record-keeping, reporting of adverse experiences, periodic reporting, product sampling and distribution, and advertising and promotion of the product. After approval, most changes to the approved product, such as adding new indications or other labeling claims, are subject to prior FDA review and approval. There also are continuing user fee requirements, under which FDA assesses an annual program fee for each product identified in an approved NDA or BLA. Biopharmaceutical manufacturers and their subcontractors are required to register their establishments with the FDA and certain state agencies, and are subject to periodic unannounced inspections by the FDA and certain state agencies for compliance with cGMP, which impose certain procedural and documentation requirements upon sponsors and their third-party manufacturers. Changes to the manufacturing process are strictly regulated, and, depending on the significance of the change, may require prior FDA approval before being implemented. FDA regulations also require investigation and correction of any deviations from cGMP and impose reporting requirements upon sponsor and third-party manufacturers. Accordingly, manufacturers must continue to expend time, money and effort in the area of production and quality control to maintain compliance with cGMP and other aspects of regulatory compliance. 24 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 trials to assess new safety risks; or imposition of distribution restrictions or other restrictions under a REMS program. Other potential consequences include, among other things: ● restrictions on the marketing or manufacturing of a product, mandated modification of promotional materials or issuance of corrective information, issuance by FDA or other regulatory authorities of safety alerts, Dear Healthcare Provider letters, press releases or other communications containing warnings or other safety information about the product, or complete withdrawal of the product from the market or product recalls; ● fines, warning or untitled letters or holds on post-approval clinical trials; ● refusal of the FDA to approve pending applications or supplements to approved applications, or suspension or revocation of existing product approvals; ● product seizure or detention, or refusal of the FDA to permit the import or export of products; or ● injunctions, consent decrees or the imposition of civil or criminal penalties. The FDA closely regulates the marketing, labeling, advertising and promotion of biopharmaceuticals. A company can make only those claims relating to safety and efficacy, purity and potency of a biopharmaceutical that are approved by the FDA and in accordance with the provisions of the approved label. The FDA and other agencies actively enforce the laws and regulations prohibiting the promotion of off-label uses. Failure to comply with these requirements can result in, among other things, adverse publicity, warning letters, corrective advertising and potential civil and criminal penalties. Physicians may prescribe legally available products for uses that are not described in the product’s labeling and that differ from those approved by the FDA. Such off-label uses are common across medical specialties. Physicians may believe that such off-label uses are the best treatment for many patients in varied circumstances. The FDA does not regulate the behavior of physicians in their choice of treatments. The FDA does, however, restrict manufacturer’s communications on the subject of off-label use of their products. Biosimilars and Reference Product Exclusivity The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or ACA, signed into law in 2010, includes a subtitle called the Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009, or BPCIA, which created an abbreviated approval pathway for biological products that are biosimilar to or interchangeable with an FDA-approved reference biological product. To date, a number of biosimilars have been licensed under the BPCIA, and numerous biosimilars have been approved in Europe. The FDA has issued several guidance documents outlining its approach to the review and approval of biosimilars. Biosimilarity, which requires that there be no clinically meaningful differences between the biological product and the reference product in terms of safety, purity, and potency, can be shown through analytical studies, animal studies, and a clinical trial or trials. Interchangeability requires that a product is biosimilar to the reference product and the product must demonstrate that it can be expected to produce the same clinical results as the reference product in any given patient and, for products that are administered multiple times to an individual, the biologic and the reference biologic may be alternated or switched after one has been previously administered without increasing safety risks or risks of diminished efficacy relative to exclusive use of the reference biologic. Complexities associated with the larger, and often more complex, structures of biological products, as well as the processes by which such products are manufactured, pose significant hurdles to implementation of the abbreviated approval pathway that are still being worked out by the FDA. 25 Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted to the FDA until four years following the date that the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. In addition, the approval of a biosimilar product may not be made effective by the FDA until 12 years from the date on which the reference product was first licensed. During this 12-year period of exclusivity, another company may still market a competing version of the reference product if the FDA approves a full BLA for the competing product containing that applicant’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of its product. The BPCIA also created certain exclusivity periods for biosimilars approved as interchangeable products. At this juncture, it is unclear whether products deemed “interchangeable” by the FDA will, in fact, be readily substituted by pharmacies, which are governed by state pharmacy law. The BPCIA is complex and continues to be interpreted and implemented by the FDA. In addition, recent government proposals have sought to reduce the 12-year reference product exclusivity period. Other aspects of the BPCIA, some of which may impact the BPCIA exclusivity provisions, have also been the subject of recent litigation. As a result, the ultimate impact, implementation, and impact of the BPCIA is subject to significant uncertainty. Other U.S. Healthcare Laws and Compliance Requirements In the United States, our current and future operations are subject to regulation by various federal, state and local authorities in addition to the FDA, including but not limited to, the Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, other divisions of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, (such as the Office of Inspector General, Office for Civil Rights and the Health Resources and Service Administration), the U.S. Department of Justice, or DOJ and individual U.S. Attorney offices within the DOJ, and state and local governments. For example, our clinical research, sales, marketing and scientific/educational grant programs will need to comply with the anti-fraud and abuse provisions of the Social Security Act, the false claims laws, the privacy and security provisions of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, and similar state laws, each as amended, as applicable. The federal Anti-Kickback Statute prohibits, among other things, any person or entity, from knowingly and willfully offering, paying, soliciting or receiving any remuneration, directly or indirectly, overtly or covertly, in cash or in kind, to induce or in return for purchasing, leasing, ordering or arranging for the purchase, lease or order of any item or service reimbursable, in whole or in part, under Medicare, Medicaid or other federal healthcare programs. The term remuneration has been interpreted broadly to include anything of value. The Anti-Kickback Statute has been interpreted to apply to arrangements between therapeutic product manufacturers on one hand and prescribers, purchasers, and formulary managers on the other. There are a number of statutory exceptions and regulatory safe harbors protecting some common activities from prosecution. The exceptions and safe harbors are drawn narrowly and practices that involve remuneration that may be alleged to be intended to induce prescribing, purchasing or recommending may be subject to scrutiny if they do not qualify for an exception or safe harbor. Failure to meet all of the requirements of a particular applicable statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor does not make the conduct per se illegal under the Anti-Kickback Statute. Instead, the legality of the arrangement will be evaluated on a case-by-case basis based on a cumulative review of all of its facts and circumstances. Our practices may not in all cases meet all of the criteria for protection under a statutory exception or regulatory safe harbor. Additionally, the intent standard under the Anti-Kickback Statute was amended by the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act of 2010, or the Affordable Care Act, to a stricter standard such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. In addition, the Affordable Care Act codified case law that a claim including items or services resulting from a violation of the federal Anti-Kickback Statute constitutes a false or fraudulent claim for purposes of the federal False Claims Act, or the FCA (discussed below). 26 The federal false claims, including the FCA, and civil monetary penalty laws, which imposes significant penalties and can be enforced by private citizens through civil qui tam actions, prohibit any person or entity from, among other things, knowingly presenting, or causing to be presented, a false or fraudulent claim for payment to, or approval by, the federal government, including federal healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, knowingly making, using, or causing to be made or used a false record or statement material to a false or fraudulent claim to the federal government, or knowingly making a false statement to improperly avoid, decrease or conceal an obligation to pay money to the federal government. A claim includes “any request or demand” for money or property presented to the U.S. government. For instance, historically, pharmaceutical and other healthcare companies have been prosecuted under these laws for allegedly providing free product to customers with the expectation that the customers would bill federal programs for the product. Other companies have been prosecuted for causing false claims to be submitted because of the companies’ marketing of the product for unapproved, off-label, and thus generally non-reimbursable, uses. HIPAA created additional federal criminal statutes that prohibit, among other things, knowingly and willfully executing, or attempting to execute, a scheme to defraud or to obtain, by means of false or fraudulent pretenses, representations or promises, any money or property owned by, or under the control or custody of, any healthcare benefit program, including private third-party payors, willfully obstructing a criminal investigation of a healthcare offense, and knowingly and willfully falsifying, concealing or covering up by trick, scheme or device, a material fact or making any materially false, fictitious or fraudulent statement in connection with the delivery of or payment for healthcare benefits, items or services. Like the Anti-Kickback Statute, the Affordable Care Act amended the intent standard for certain healthcare fraud statutes under HIPAA such that a person or entity no longer needs to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation. Also, many states have similar, and typically more prohibitive, fraud and abuse statutes or regulations that apply to items and services reimbursed under Medicaid and other state programs, or, in several states, apply regardless of the payor. We may be subject to data privacy and security regulations by both the federal government and the states in which it conducts business. HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH, and its implementing regulations, imposes requirements on “covered entities,” including certain healthcare providers, health plans, and healthcare clearinghouses, as well as their respective “business associates” that create, receive, maintain or transmit individually identifiable health information for or on behalf of a covered entity as well as their covered subcontractors relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information. Among other things, HITECH makes HIPAA’s privacy and security standards directly applicable to business associates, independent contractors, or agents of covered entities that receive or obtain protected health information in connection with providing a service on behalf of a covered entity. HITECH also created four new tiers of civil monetary penalties, amended HIPAA to make civil and criminal penalties directly applicable to business associates, and gave state attorneys general new authority to file civil actions for damages or injunctions in federal courts to enforce HIPAA and seek attorneys’ fees and costs associated with pursuing federal civil actions. In addition, many state laws govern the privacy and security of health information in specified circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted by HIPAA, and may have a more prohibitive effect than HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts. We may develop products that, once approved, may be administered by a physician. Under currently applicable U.S. law, certain products not usually self-administered (including injectable drugs) may be eligible for coverage under Medicare through Medicare Part B. Medicare Part B is part of original Medicare, the federal health care program that provides health care benefits to the aged and disabled, and covers outpatient services and supplies, including certain biopharmaceutical products, that are medically necessary to treat a beneficiary’s health condition. As a condition of receiving Medicare Part B reimbursement for a manufacturer’s eligible drugs, the manufacturer is required to participate in other government healthcare programs, including the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program and the 340B Drug Pricing Program. The Medicaid Drug Rebate Program requires pharmaceutical manufacturers to enter into and have in effect a national rebate agreement with the Secretary of HHS as a condition for states to receive federal matching funds for the manufacturer’s outpatient drugs furnished to Medicaid patients. Under the 340B Drug Pricing Program, the manufacturer must extend discounts to entities that participate in the program. 27 In addition, many pharmaceutical manufacturers must calculate and report certain price reporting metrics to the government, such as average sales price, or ASP, and best price. Penalties may apply in some cases when such metrics are not submitted accurately and timely. Further, these prices for drugs may be reduced by mandatory discounts or rebates required by government healthcare programs or private payors and by any future relaxation of laws that presently restrict imports of drugs from countries where they may be sold at lower prices than in the United States. It is difficult to predict how Medicare coverage and reimbursement policies will be applied to our products in the future and coverage and reimbursement under different federal healthcare programs are not always consistent. Medicare reimbursement rates may also reflect budgetary constraints placed on the Medicare program. Additionally, the federal Physician Payments Sunshine Act, or the Sunshine Act, within the Affordable Care Act, and its implementing regulations, require that certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biological and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) report annually to CMS information related to certain payments or other transfers of value made or distributed to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), other healthcare professionals (such as physicians assistants and nurse practitioners) and teaching hospitals, or to entities or individuals at the request of, or designated on behalf of, the physicians and teaching hospitals and to report annually certain ownership and investment interests held by physicians and their immediate family members. Failure to report accurately could result in penalties. In addition, many states also govern the reporting of payments or other transfers of value, many of which differ from each other in significant ways, are often not pre-empted, and may have a more prohibitive effect than the Sunshine Act, thus further complicating compliance efforts. In order to distribute products commercially, we must comply with state laws that require the registration of manufacturers and wholesale distributors of drug and biological products in a state, including, in certain states, manufacturers and distributors who ship products into the state even if such manufacturers or distributors have no place of business within the state. Some states also impose requirements on manufacturers and distributors to establish the pedigree of product in the chain of distribution, including some states that require manufacturers and others to adopt new technology capable of tracking and tracing product as it moves through the distribution chain. Several states and/or localities have enacted legislation requiring pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to establish marketing compliance programs, file periodic reports with the state, make periodic public disclosures on sales, marketing, pricing, clinical trials and other activities, and/or register their sales representatives, as well as to prohibit pharmacies and other healthcare entities from providing certain physician prescribing data to pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies for use in sales and marketing, and to prohibit certain other sales and marketing practices. All of our activities are potentially subject to federal and state consumer protection and unfair competition laws. Ensuring business arrangements with third parties comply with applicable healthcare laws and regulations is a costly endeavor. If our operations are found to be in violation of any of the federal and state healthcare laws described above or any other current or future governmental regulations that apply to it, it may be subject to penalties, including without limitation, significant civil, criminal and/or administrative penalties, damages, fines, disgorgement, imprisonment, exclusion from participation in government programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid, injunctions, private “qui tam” actions brought by individual whistleblowers in the name of the government, or refusal to allow it to enter into government contracts, contractual damages, reputational harm, administrative burdens, diminished profits and future earnings, additional reporting obligations and oversight if we become subject to a corporate integrity agreement or other agreement to resolve allegations of non-compliance with these laws, and the curtailment or restructuring of its operations, any of which could adversely affect our ability to operate our business and our results of operations. 28 Coverage, Pricing and Reimbursement Significant uncertainty exists as to the coverage and reimbursement status of any product candidates for which we may obtain regulatory approval. In the United States and in foreign markets, sales of any products for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale will depend, in part, on the extent to which third-party payors provide coverage and establish adequate reimbursement levels for such products. In the United States, third-party payors include federal and state healthcare programs, private managed care providers, health insurers and other organizations. Adequate coverage and reimbursement from governmental healthcare programs, such as Medicare and Medicaid in the United States, and commercial payors are critical to new product acceptance. Our ability to commercialize any products successfully also will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and reimbursement for these products and related treatments will be available from government health administration authorities, private health insurers and other organizations. Government authorities and other third-party payors, such as private health insurers and health maintenance organizations, decide which therapeutics they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Coverage and reimbursement by a third-party payor may depend upon a number of factors, including the third-party payor’s determination that use of a therapeutic is: ● a covered benefit under its health plan; ● safe, effective and medically necessary; ● appropriate for the specific patient; ● cost-effective; and ● neither experimental nor investigational. We cannot be sure that reimbursement will be available for any product that it commercializes and, if coverage and reimbursement are available, what the level of reimbursement will be. Coverage may also be more limited than the purposes for which the product is approved by the FDA or comparable foreign regulatory authorities. Reimbursement may impact the demand for, or the price of, any product for which we obtain regulatory approval. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the price, examining the medical necessity, and reviewing the cost-effectiveness of medical products, therapies and services, in addition to questioning their safety and efficacy. Obtaining reimbursement for our products may be particularly difficult because of the higher prices often associated with branded drugs and drugs administered under the supervision of a physician. We may need to conduct expensive pharmacoeconomic studies in order to demonstrate the medical necessity and cost-effectiveness of our products, in addition to the costs required to obtain FDA approvals. Our product candidates may not be considered medically necessary or cost-effective. Obtaining coverage and reimbursement approval of a product from a government or other third-party payor is a time-consuming and costly process that could require us to provide to each payor supporting scientific, clinical and cost-effectiveness data for the use of our product on a payor-by-payor basis, with no assurance that coverage and adequate reimbursement will be obtained. A payor’s decision to provide coverage for a product does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Further, one payor’s determination to provide coverage for a product does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage for the product. Adequate third-party reimbursement may not be available to enable us to maintain price levels sufficient 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 any product candidate that it successfully develops. 29 Different pricing and reimbursement schemes exist in other countries. In the European Union, governments influence the price of biopharmaceutical products through their pricing and reimbursement rules and control of national health care systems that fund a large part of the cost of those products to consumers. Some jurisdictions operate positive and negative list systems under which products may only be marketed once a reimbursement price has been agreed. To obtain reimbursement or pricing approval, some of these countries may require the completion of clinical trials that compare the cost effectiveness of a particular product candidate to currently available therapies. Other member states allow companies to fix their own prices for medicines but monitor and control company profits. The downward pressure on health care costs has become intense. As a result, increasingly high barriers are being erected to the entry of new products. In addition, in some countries, cross-border imports from low-priced markets exert a commercial pressure on pricing within a country. The marketability of any product candidates for which we receive regulatory approval for commercial sale may suffer if the government and third-party payors fail to provide adequate coverage and reimbursement. In addition, emphasis on managed care, the increasing influence of health maintenance organizations, and additional legislative changes in the United States has increased, and we expect will continue to increase, the pressure on healthcare pricing. The downward pressure on the rise in healthcare costs in general, particularly prescription medicines, medical devices and surgical procedures and other treatments, has become very intense. 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. Healthcare Reform In the United States and some foreign jurisdictions, there have been, and continue to be, several legislative and regulatory changes and proposed changes regarding the healthcare system that could prevent or delay marketing approval of product candidates, restrict or regulate post-approval activities, and affect the ability to profitably sell product candidates for which marketing approval is obtained. Among policy makers and payors in the United States and elsewhere, there is significant interest in promoting changes in healthcare systems with the stated goals of containing healthcare costs, improving quality and/or expanding access. In the United States, the pharmaceutical industry has been a particular focus of these efforts and has been significantly affected by major legislative initiatives. For example, the Affordable Care Act has substantially changed healthcare financing and delivery by both governmental and private insurers. Among the Affordable Care Act provisions of importance to the pharmaceutical and biotechnology industries, in addition to those otherwise described above, are the following: ● an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports certain specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents apportioned among these entities according to their market share in some government healthcare programs; ● an increase in the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program to 23.1% and 13% of the average manufacturer price for most branded and generic drugs, respectively, and capped the total rebate amount for innovator drugs at 100% of the Average Manufacturer Price, or the AMP; ● a new Medicare Part D coverage gap discount program, in which manufacturers must now agree to offer 70% point-of-sale discounts off negotiated prices of applicable brand drugs to eligible beneficiaries during their coverage gap period, as a condition for the manufacturers’ outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D; ● an extension of manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations; 30 ● an expansion of eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs by, among other things, allowing states to offer Medicaid coverage to additional individuals and by adding new mandatory eligibility categories for individuals with income at or below 133% of the federal poverty level, thereby potentially increasing manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability; ● an expansion of the entities eligible for discounts under the 340B Drug Discount Program; ● a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; ● an expansion of healthcare fraud and abuse laws, including the FCA and the Anti-Kickback Statute, new government investigative powers, and enhanced penalties for noncompliance; ● a new methodology by which rebates owed by manufacturers under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program are calculated for drugs that are inhaled, infused, instilled, implanted, or injected; ● a requirement to report certain financial arrangements with physicians and teaching hospitals; ● a requirement to annually report certain information regarding drug samples that manufacturers and distributors provide to physicians; ● the establishment of a Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation at CMS to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending; and ● a licensure framework for follow on biologic products. There remain legal and political challenges to certain aspects of the Affordable Care Act. Starting in January 2017, the Trump administration signed several executive orders and other directives designed to delay, circumvent, or loosen certain requirements mandated by the Affordable Care Act. In December 2017, Congress repealed the tax penalty for an individual’s failure to maintain Affordable Care Act-mandated health insurance as part of a tax reform bill. Further, the 2020 federal spending package permanently eliminated the Affordable Care Act-mandated “Cadillac” tax on high-cost employer-sponsored health coverage and medical device tax and also eliminated the health insurer tax. On June 17, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court dismissed a challenge on procedural grounds that argued the Affordable Care Act is unconstitutional in its entirety because the “individual mandate” was repealed by Congress. Thus, the Affordable Care Act will remain in effect in its current form. Further, prior to the U.S. Supreme Court ruling, on January 28, 2021, President Biden issued an executive order to initiate a special enrollment period for purposes of obtaining health insurance coverage through the Affordable Care Act marketplace. The executive order also instructed certain governmental agencies to review and reconsider their existing policies and rules that limit access to healthcare, including among others, reexamining Medicaid demonstration projects and waiver programs that include work requirements, and policies that create unnecessary barriers to obtaining access to health insurance coverage through Medicaid or the Affordable Care Act. It is possible that the Affordable Care Act will be subject to judicial or Congressional challenges in the future. It is unclear how such challenges and the healthcare reform measures of the Biden administration will impact the Affordable Care Act and our business. We anticipate that the Affordable Care Act, if substantially maintained in its current form, will continue to result in additional downward pressure on coverage and the price that we receive for any approved product, and could seriously harm our business. Any reduction in reimbursement from Medicare and 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. Such reforms could have an adverse effect on anticipated revenue from product candidates that we may successfully develop and for which we may obtain regulatory approval and may affect our overall financial condition and ability to develop product candidates. 31 Further legislation or regulation could be passed that could harm our business, financial condition and results of operations. Other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the Affordable Care Act was enacted. For example, in August 2011, President Obama signed into law the Budget Control Act of 2011, which, among other things, created the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction to recommend to Congress proposals in spending reductions. The Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction did not achieve a targeted deficit reduction of at least $1.2 trillion for fiscal years 2012 through 2021, triggering the legislation’s automatic reduction to several government programs. This includes aggregate reductions to Medicare payments to providers of up to 2% per fiscal year, which went into effect beginning on April 1, 2013 and will stay in effect through 2031 unless additional Congressional action is taken. However, COVID-19 pandemic relief legislation suspended the 2% Medicare sequester from May 1, 2020 through March 31, 2021. Under current legislation, the actual reduction in Medicare payments varied from 1% in 2022 to up to 3% in the final fiscal year of this sequester. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, President Biden signed the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, beginning January 1, 2024. In January 2013, the American Taxpayer Relief Act of 2012 was signed into law, which, among other things, further reduced Medicare payments to several types of providers, including hospitals, imaging centers and cancer treatment centers, and increased the statute of limitations period for the government to recover overpayments to providers from three to five years. Additionally, there has been increasing legislative and enforcement interest in the United States with respect to specialty drug pricing practices. Specifically, there have been several recent U.S. Congressional inquiries and proposed federal 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. For example, the Trump administration used several means to propose or implement drug pricing reform, including through federal budget proposals, executive orders and policy initiatives. For example, on July 24, 2020 and September 13, 2020, the Trump administration announced several executive orders related to prescription drug pricing that attempt to implement several of the administration’s proposals. The FDA also released a final rule and guidance implementing a portion of the importation executive order providing pathways for states to build and submit importation plans for drugs from Canada. Further, on November 20, 2020, the Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, finalized a regulation removing safe harbor protection for price reductions from pharmaceutical manufacturers to plan sponsors under Part D, either directly or through pharmacy benefit managers, unless the price reduction is required by law. The implementation of the rule was delayed by the Biden administration from January 1, 2022 to January 1, 2023 in response to ongoing litigation. The rule also creates a new safe harbor for price reductions reflected at the point-of-sale, as well as a new safe harbor for certain fixed fee arrangements between pharmacy benefit managers and manufacturers, the implementation of which also was delayed until January 1, 2023. On November 20, 2020, CMS issued an interim final rule implementing former President Trump’s Most Favored Nation, or MFN, executive order, which would tie Medicare Part B payments for certain physician-administered drugs to the lowest price paid in other economically advanced countries, and was effective as of January 1, 2021. As a result of litigation challenging the MFN model, on August 10, 2021, CMS published a proposed rule that rescinded the MFN model interim final rule. As a result of litigation challenging the MFN model, on December 27, 2021, CMS published a final rule that rescinded the Most Favored Nation model interim final rule. In July 2021, the Biden administration released an executive order, “Promoting Competition in the American Economy,” with multiple provisions aimed at prescription drugs. In response to Biden’s executive order, on September 9, 2021, HHS released a Comprehensive Plan for Addressing High Drug Prices that outlines principles for drug pricing reform and sets out a variety of potential legislative policies that Congress could pursue to advance these principles. No legislation or administrative actions have been finalized to implement these principles. In addition, on August 16, 2022, President Biden signed into law the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, which, among other things, contains substantial drug pricing reforms that will reduce drug spending by the federal government. For example, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 limits the prices paid by Medicare for various prescription drugs and requires drug manufacturers to pay rebates to Medicare if they increase prices faster than inflation for drugs used by Medicare beneficiaries. Although the effect of the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 on our business and the pharmaceutical industry in general is not yet known, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 could affect the prices we can charge and the reimbursement we can receive for our product candidates, if approved, thereby reducing our profitability. We also expect that additional state and federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates if approved or additional pricing pressures. The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act The Foreign Corrupt Practices Act, or the FCPA, prohibits any U.S. individual or business from paying, offering, or authorizing payment or offering of anything of value, directly or indirectly, to any foreign official, political party or candidate for the purpose of influencing any act or decision of the foreign entity in order to assist the individual or business in obtaining or retaining business. The FCPA also obligates companies whose securities are listed in the United States to comply with accounting provisions requiring us to maintain books and records that accurately and fairly reflect all transactions of the corporation, including international subsidiaries, and to devise and maintain an adequate system of internal accounting controls for international operations. Additional Regulation In addition to the foregoing, state and federal laws regarding environmental protection and hazardous substances, including the Occupational Safety and Health Act, the Resource Conservancy and Recovery Act and the Toxic Substances Control Act, affect our business. These and other laws govern our use, handling and disposal of various biological, chemical and radioactive substances used in, and wastes generated by, our operations. If our operations result in contamination of the environment or expose individuals to hazardous substances, we could be liable for damages and governmental fines. We believe that we are in material compliance with applicable environmental laws and that continued compliance therewith will not have a material adverse effect on our business. We cannot predict, however, how changes in these laws may affect our future operations. 32 Other Regulations We are also subject to numerous federal, state and local laws relating to such matters as safe working conditions, manufacturing practices, environmental protection, fire hazard control, and disposal of hazardous or potentially hazardous substances. We may incur significant costs to comply with such laws and regulations now or in the future. Employees As of December 31, 2022, we had 25 employees, all of whom were full-time employees. As of December 31, 2022, 13 of our employees were engaged in research and development activities and 12 of our employees were engaged in business development, legal, finance, market development, information systems, facilities, human resources or administrative support. As of December 31, 2022, all of our employees were located in the United States. None of our United States employees are represented by any collective bargaining agreements. We believe that we maintain good relations with our employees. COVID-19 and Related Macroeconomic Conditions The COVID-19 pandemic and related macroeconomic conditions, such as supply chain shortages, inflation and economic volatility have, and may continue to have, an impact on our results of operations. We will continue to monitor whether such conditions would have a material impact on our operations, liquidity and capital resources. Further, rising inflation has, in part, caused a disruption in the capital markets, which may lead to a recession or market correction that could impact our access to capital, and could in the future negatively affect our liquidity. A recession or market correction, continued supply chain disruptions and/or inflation could materially affect our business and the value of our common stock. See “ —Risks Related to Our Financial Condition ” below. Corporate Information On January 9, 2020, Protara Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly ArTara Therapeutics, Inc., formerly Proteon Therapeutics, Inc., or the Company or Protara), and privately-held ArTara Subsidiary, Inc., or Private ArTara, completed the merger and reorganization, or the Merger, in accordance with the terms of the Agreement and Plan of Merger and Reorganization, dated September 23, 2019, or the Merger Agreement, by and among the Company, Private ArTara and REM 1 Acquisition, Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company, or Merger Sub, whereby Merger Sub merged with and into Private ArTara, with Private ArTara surviving as a wholly owned subsidiary of the Company. The Merger was structured as a reverse merger and Private ArTara was determined to be the accounting acquirer based on the terms of the Merger and other factors. We were originally incorporated in Delaware in March 2006, and at that time, acquired Proteon Therapeutics, LLC, the predecessor of Protara, which was formed in June 2001. Our principal executive offices are located at 345 Park Avenue South, 3 rd Floor, New York, New York 10010, our telephone number is (646) 844-0337 and our website address is www.protaratx.com. The contents of our website are not incorporated into this Annual Report on Form 10-K and our reference to the URL for our website is intended to be an inactive textual reference only. The information contained on, or that can be accessed through, our website is not a part of this document. Unless the context requires otherwise, references in this Annual Report on Form 10-K to “Protara”, “TARA”, “we”, “us”, the “Company” and “our” refer to Protara Therapeutics, Inc. (formerly ArTara Therapeutics, Inc., formerly Proteon Therapeutics, Inc.) and our subsidiaries. Available Information Annual Reports on Form 10-K, Quarterly Reports on Form 10-Q, Current Reports on Form 8-K, and amendments to reports filed pursuant to Sections 13(a) and 15(d) of the Securities Exchange Act of 1934, as amended, or the Exchange Act, will be made available free of charge on our website as soon as reasonably practicable after we electronically file such material with, or furnish it to, the SEC. 33