PRECISION BIOSCIENCES INC

Previous wording

In addition, we have not commercialized any products and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development activities, including our preclinical development activities, and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We have financed our operations primarily through proceeds from upfront and milestone payments from collaboration and licensing agreements, our IPO, private placements of our common stock, convertible preferred stock and convertible debt financings, underwritten and at-the-market (“ATM”) offerings of common stock, and borrowings on credit facilities. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the amount and growth rate of our expenses and our ability to generate revenues.

Current wording

We do not expect to be profitable in the foreseeable future. Since inception, we have incurred significant operating losses. If our product candidates are not successfully developed and approved, we may never generate any revenue from product sales. Our net income was $7.2 million for the year ended December 31, 2024. As of December 31, 2024, we had an accumulated deficit of $482.5 million. In addition, we have not commercialized any products and have never generated any revenue from product sales. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development activities, including our preclinical development activities, and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. We have financed our operations primarily through proceeds from upfront and milestone payments from collaboration and licensing agreements, our IPO, private placements of our common stock, convertible preferred stock and convertible debt financings, underwritten and at-the-market (“ATM”) offerings of common stock and warrants, and borrowings on credit facilities. The amount of our future net losses will depend, in part, on the amount and growth rate of our expenses and our ability to generate revenues.

Previous wording

We believe that, as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, existing cash and cash equivalents, expected operational receipts, including upfront and potential near-term consideration to be received from TG Therapeutics and other licensees, operational efficiencies gained from divestment of our historical CAR T operations, and availability of our ATM facility will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the second half of 2026. We expect our cash runway to be sufficient to achieve first-in-human Phase 1 clinical data for PBGENE-HBV and PBGENE-PMM. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our operating plans and other demands on our cash resources may change as a result of many factors, including factors unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings or other sources, such as strategic collaborations and licensing arrangements.

Current wording

We believe that, as of the date of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, existing cash and cash equivalents, expected operational receipts, including upfront and potential near-term consideration to be received from our licensees, operational efficiencies gained from divestment of our historical CAR T operations, and availability of our ATM facility will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the second half of 2026. We expect our cash runway to be sufficient to achieve first-in-human Phase 1 clinical data for two of our wholly-owned programs. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our operating plans and other demands on our cash resources may change as a result of many factors, including the outcomes of preclinical studies and clinical trials, our ability to obtain regulatory approval, investor interest in and the likelihood of commercial success of particular product candidates and programs, and other factors unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through public or private equity or debt financings or other sources, such as strategic collaborations and licensing arrangements, or abandon one or more product candidates or programs in the event that sufficient funding is not available.

Previous wording

Even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may continue to seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or in light of specific strategic considerations. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, SEC regulations limit the amount that companies with a public float of less than $75 million may raise during any 12-month period pursuant to a shelf registration statement on Form S-3.

Current wording

Even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans, we may continue to seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or in light of specific strategic considerations. Adequate additional financing may not be available to us on acceptable terms, or at all. In addition, SEC regulations limit the amount that companies with a public float of less than $75 million may raise during any 12-month period pursuant to a shelf registration statement on Form S-3. As of the filing of this Annual Report on Form 10-K, we are subject to General Instruction I.B.6 to Form S-3 (the “Baby Shelf Rule”). Under the Baby Shelf Rule, the amount of funds we can raise through primary public offerings of securities in any 12-month period using our registration statement on Form S-3 is limited to one-third of the aggregate market value of the shares of our common stock held by non-affiliates. Therefore, we will be limited in the amount of proceeds we are able to raise by selling shares of our common stock using our Form S-3, including through our ATM facility, until our public float exceeds $75 million. Furthermore, if we are required to file a new registration statement on another form, we may incur additional costs and be subject to delays due to review by the SEC staff.

Previous wording

The Revolving Line requires us, and any debt instruments we may enter into in the future may require us, to comply with various covenants that limit our ability to, among other things:

Current wording

The 2024 Loan and Security Agreement requires us to comply with various covenants that limit our ability to, among other things:

Previous wording

Additionally, the credit markets and the financial services industry have been experiencing disruption characterized by the bankruptcy, failure, collapse or sale of various financial institutions, increased volatility in securities prices, diminished liquidity and credit availability and intervention from the U.S. and other governments. As a result, the cost and availability of credit has been and may continue to be adversely affected. We cannot be certain that funding under our Revolving Line will be available from PWB and the credit markets generally when and as needed, and if available, on acceptable terms if at all. If we are unable to obtain funding when needed and on acceptable terms, our financial condition and business prospects could be adversely impacted.

Current wording

Additionally, the credit markets and the financial services industry have been experiencing disruption characterized by the bankruptcy, failure, collapse or sale of various financial institutions, increased volatility in securities prices, diminished liquidity and credit availability and intervention from the U.S. and other governments. As a result, the cost and availability of credit has been and may continue to be adversely affected. We cannot be certain that funding will be available when and as needed, and if available, on acceptable terms if at all. If we are unable to obtain funding when needed and on acceptable terms, our financial condition and business prospects could be adversely impacted.

Previous wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenues, we expect to finance our cash needs through a combination of equity and/or debt financings and collaborations, licensing agreements or other strategic arrangements. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, including in underwritten and ATM offerings, stockholders' ownership interest will be diluted, and the terms of such securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect common stockholders' rights. To the extent that we raise additional capital through debt financing, it would result in increased fixed payment obligations and a portion of our operating cash flows, if any, being dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on such indebtedness. In addition, debt financing may involve agreements that include restrictive covenants that impose operating restrictions, such as restrictions on the incurrence of additional debt, the making of certain capital expenditures or the declaration of dividends. To the extent we raise additional capital through arrangements with collaborators or otherwise, we may be required to relinquish some of our technologies, research programs, product development activities, product candidates and/or future revenue streams, license our technologies and/or product candidates on unfavorable terms or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us. Furthermore, any capital raising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to advance research programs, product development activities or product candidates.

Current wording

To the extent that we raise additional capital through debt financing, it would result in increased fixed payment obligations and a portion of our operating cash flows, if any, being dedicated to the payment of principal and interest on such indebtedness. In addition, debt financing may involve agreements that include restrictive covenants that impose operating restrictions, such as restrictions on the incurrence of additional debt, the making of certain capital expenditures or the declaration of dividends. To the extent we raise additional capital through arrangements with collaborators or otherwise, we may be required to relinquish some of our technologies, research programs, product development activities, product candidates and/or future revenue streams, license our technologies and/or product candidates on unfavorable terms or otherwise agree to terms unfavorable to us. Furthermore, any capital raising efforts may divert our management from their day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to advance research programs, product development activities or product candidates.

Previous wording

To date, we have focused our efforts on optimizing our proprietary genome editing technology and exploring its potential applications. ARCUS is a novel genome editing technology using sequence-specific DNA-cutting enzymes, or nucleases, that is designed to perform modifications in the DNA of living cells and organisms. Other companies have previously undertaken research and development of genome editing technologies using zinc finger nucleases, transcription activator-like effector nucleases (“TALENs”) and clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats associated protein-9 nuclease (“CRISPR/Cas9”), although none has obtained marketing approval for a product candidate developed using such technologies. Other genome editing technologies in development or commercially available, or other existing or future technologies, may lead to treatments or products that may be considered better suited for use in human therapeutics, which could reduce or eliminate our commercial opportunity.

Current wording

To date, we have focused our efforts on optimizing our proprietary genome editing technology and exploring its potential applications. ARCUS is a novel genome editing technology using sequence-specific DNA-cutting enzymes, or nucleases, that is designed to perform modifications in the DNA of living cells and organisms. Other companies have previously undertaken research and development of genome editing technologies using zinc finger nucleases, TALENs and CRISPR/Cas9, although none has obtained marketing approval for anin vivo gene editing product candidate developed using such technologies. Other genome editing technologies in development or commercially available, or other existing or future technologies, may lead to treatments or products that may be considered better suited for use in human therapeutics, which could reduce or eliminate our commercial opportunity.

Previous wording

In addition to the submission of an IND to the FDA, before initiation of a clinical trial in the United States, certain human clinical trials subject to the NIH Guidelines are subject to review and oversight by an institutional biosafety committee (“IBC”), a local institutional committee that reviews and oversees research utilizing recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecules at that institution. The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them. We are subject to significant regulatory oversight by the FDA, and in addition to the government regulators, the applicable IBC and IRB of each institution at which we or our collaborators conduct clinical trials of our product candidates, or a central IRB if appropriate, would need to review and approve the proposed clinical trial.

Current wording

The IBC assesses the safety of the research and identifies any potential risk to public health or the environment, and such review may result in some delay before initiation of a clinical trial. While the NIH Guidelines are not mandatory unless the research in question is being conducted at or sponsored by institutions receiving NIH funding of recombinant or synthetic nucleic acid molecule research, many companies and other institutions not otherwise subject to the NIH Guidelines voluntarily follow them. We are subject to significant regulatory oversight by the FDA, and in addition to the government regulators, the applicable IBC and Institutional Review Board (“IRB”) of each institution at which we or our collaborators conduct clinical trials of our product candidates, or a central IRB if appropriate, would need to review and approve the proposed clinical trial.

Previous wording

The same applies in the EU. The EMA has a Committee for Advanced Therapies (“CAT”) that is responsible for assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of ATMPs. ATMPs include gene therapy medicine, somatic-cell therapy medicines and tissue-engineered medicines. The role of the CAT is to prepare a draft opinion on an application for marketing authorization for a gene therapy medicinal product candidate that is submitted to the EMA. In the EU, the development and evaluation of a gene therapy medicinal product must be considered in the context of the relevant EU guidelines. The EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines. Similarly complex regulatory environments exist in other jurisdictions in which we might consider seeking regulatory approvals for our product candidates, further complicating the regulatory landscape. As a result, the procedures and standards applied to gene therapy products and cell therapy products may be applied to any of our gene therapy or genome editing product candidates, but that remains uncertain at this point.

Current wording

Similar requirements apply in the EU. The European Medicine Agency (“EMA”) has a Committee for Advanced Therapies (“CAT”) that is responsible for assessing the quality, safety and efficacy of advanced therapy medicinal products (“ATMPs”). ATMPs include gene therapy medicine, somatic-cell therapy medicines and tissue-engineered medicines. The role of the CAT is to prepare a draft opinion on an application for marketing authorization for a gene therapy medicinal product candidate that is submitted to the EMA. In the EU, the development and evaluation of a gene therapy medicinal product must be considered in the context of the relevant EU guidelines. The EMA may issue new guidelines concerning the development and marketing authorization for gene therapy medicinal products and require that we comply with these new guidelines. Similarly complex regulatory environments exist in other jurisdictions in which we might consider seeking regulatory approvals for our product candidates, further complicating the regulatory landscape. As a result, the procedures and standards applied to gene therapy products and cell therapy products may be applied to any of our gene therapy or genome editing product candidates, but that remains uncertain at this point.

Previous wording

In addition, FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may change their approval policies and new regulations may be enacted. For instance, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently undergoing a complete review process, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. The European Commission’s proposal for revision of several legislative instruments related to medicinal products (potentially revising the duration of regulatory exclusivity, eligibility for expedited pathways, etc.) is currently expected during the first quarter of 2023. The proposed revisions, once they are agreed and adopted by the European Parliament and European Council (not expected before the end of 2024 or early 2025) may have a significant impact on the biopharmaceutical industry in the long term.

Current wording

In addition, FDA and foreign regulatory authorities may change their approval policies and new regulations may be enacted. For instance, the EU pharmaceutical legislation is currently undergoing a complete review process, in the context of the Pharmaceutical Strategy for Europe initiative, launched by the European Commission in November 2020. The European Commission’s proposal for revision of several legislative instruments related to medicinal products (potentially revising the duration of regulatory exclusivity, eligibility for expedited pathways, etc.) was published April 2023. The proposal revisions, once they are agreed and adopted by the European Parliament and European Council (not expected before 2026) may have a significant impact on the biopharmaceutical industry in the long term.

Previous wording

suspensions or terminations by IRBs of the institutions at which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board (“DSMB”) for such trial or by the FDA or other foreign regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including those described above;

Current wording

suspensions or terminations by IRBs of the institutions at which such trials are being conducted, by the Data Safety Monitoring Board for such trial or by the FDA or other foreign regulatory authorities due to a number of factors, including those described above;

Previous wording

It is currently unclear to what extent the United Kingdom (“UK”) will seek to align its regulations with the EU. The UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from existing EU legislation (as implemented into UK law, through secondary legislation).

Current wording

It is currently unclear to what extent the UK will seek to align its regulations with the EU. The UK regulatory framework in relation to clinical trials is derived from the now-repealed EU Clinical Trials Directive (as implemented into UK law, through the Medicines for Human Use (Clinical Trials) Regulations 2004, as amended).

Previous wording

We expect our manufacturing strategy for one or more of our product candidates may involve the use of contract manufacturing organizations (“CMOs”). The facilities used by us and our contract manufacturers to manufacture therapeutic product candidates must be evaluated for the manufacture of our product candidates by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit a BLA to the FDA, or similar foreign applications to foreign regulatory authorities. We do not control the manufacturing process of our contract manufacturers and are dependent on their compliance with cGMP or similar foreign requirements for their manufacture of our product candidates. We may establish multiple manufacturing facilities as we expand our commercial footprint to multiple geographies, which will be costly and time consuming and may lead to regulatory delays. Even if we are successful, our manufacturing capabilities could be affected by cost-overruns, potential problems with scale-out, process reproducibility, stability issues, lot inconsistency, timely availability of reagents or raw materials, unexpected delays, equipment failures, labor shortages, natural disasters, utility failures, regulatory issues and other factors that could prevent us from realizing the intended benefits of our manufacturing strategy and have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

We expect our manufacturing strategy for one or more of our product candidates may involve the use of CMOs. The facilities used by us and our contract manufacturers to manufacture therapeutic product candidates must be evaluated for the manufacture of our product candidates by the FDA or foreign regulatory authorities pursuant to inspections that will be conducted after we submit a BLA to the FDA, or similar foreign applications to foreign regulatory authorities. While we work closely with our CMOs on the manufacturing processes for our product candidates, including quality audits, we do not control the manufacturing process of our contract manufacturers and are dependent on their compliance with current good manufacturing practices (“cGMP”) or similar foreign requirements for their manufacture of our product candidates. We may establish multiple manufacturing facilities as we expand our commercial footprint to multiple geographies, which will be costly and time consuming and may lead to regulatory delays. Even if we are successful, our manufacturing capabilities could be affected by cost-overruns, potential problems with scale-out, process reproducibility, stability issues, lot inconsistency, timely availability of reagents or raw materials, unexpected delays, equipment failures, labor shortages, natural disasters, utility failures, regulatory issues and other factors that could prevent us from realizing the intended benefits of our manufacturing strategy and have a material adverse effect on our business.

Previous wording

the U.S. Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to CMS information related to payments or other “transfers of value” made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician practitioners such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners, and teaching hospitals, and requires applicable manufacturers and group purchasing organizations to report annually to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”), ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members; and

Current wording

the U.S. Physician Payments Sunshine Act, which requires certain manufacturers of drugs, devices, biologics and medical supplies for which payment is available under Medicare, Medicaid or the Children’s Health Insurance Program (with certain exceptions) to report annually to the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services (“CMS”) information related to payments or other “transfers of value” made to physicians (defined to include doctors, dentists, optometrists, podiatrists and chiropractors), certain non-physician practitioners such as physician assistants and nurse practitioners, and teaching hospitals, and requires applicable manufacturers and group purchasing organizations to report annually to the CMS, ownership and investment interests held by the physicians described above and their immediate family members; and

Previous wording

Certain states have also adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, some of which may be more stringent than HIPAA. Such laws and regulations will be subject to interpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our future customers and strategic partners. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018 (“CCPA”), which went into effect on January 1, 2020. The CCPA creates individual privacy rights for California consumers and increases the privacy and security obligations of entities handling certain personal information. The CCPA provides for civil penalties for violations, as well as a private right of action for data breaches that has increased the likelihood of and risks associated with data breach litigation. Further, the California Privacy Rights Act (“CPRA”) generally went into effect on January 1, 2023, and significantly amends the CCPA. The CPRA imposes additional data protection obligations on covered businesses, including additional consumer rights processes, limitations on data uses, new audit requirements for higher risk data, and opt outs for certain uses of sensitive data. It also creates a new California data protection agency authorized to issue substantive regulations and could result in increased privacy and information security enforcement. Similar laws have passed in Virginia, Colorado, Connecticut and Utah, and have been proposed in other states and at the federal level, reflecting a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States. The enactment of such laws could have potentially conflicting requirements that would make compliance challenging. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA, the CPRA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

Current wording

Certain states have also adopted comparable privacy and security laws and regulations, which govern the privacy, processing, and protection of health-related and other personal information. Such laws and regulations will be subject to interpretation by various courts and other governmental authorities, thus creating potentially complex compliance issues for us and our future customers and strategic partners. For example, California enacted the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, as amended by the California Privacy Rights Act (collectively, the CCPA) requires covered businesses that process the personal information of California residents to, among other things: (i) provide certain disclosures to California residents regarding the business’s collection, use, and disclosure of their personal information; (ii) receive and respond to requests from California residents to access, delete, and correct their personal information, or to opt out of certain disclosures of their personal information; and (iii) enter into specific contractual provisions with service providers that process California resident personal information on the business’s behalf. Similar laws have passed in a number of states, and have been proposed in other states and at the federal level, reflecting a trend toward more stringent privacy legislation in the United States. The enactment of such laws could have potentially conflicting requirements that would make compliance challenging. In the event that we are subject to or affected by HIPAA, the CCPA, the CPRA or other domestic privacy and data protection laws, any liability from failure to comply with the requirements of these laws could adversely affect our financial condition.

Previous wording

These recent developments may require us to review and amend the legal mechanisms by which we make and/or receive personal data transfers to/ in the U.S. As supervisory authorities issue further guidance on personal data export mechanisms, including circumstances where the standard contractual clauses cannot be used, and/or start taking enforcement action, we could suffer additional costs, complaints and/or regulatory investigations or fines, and/or if we are otherwise unable to transfer personal data between and among countries and regions in which we operate, it could affect the manner in which we provide our services, the geographical location or segregation of our relevant systems and operations, and could adversely affect our financial results.

Current wording

Among other requirements, the GDPR regulates transfers of personal data subject to the GDPR to third countries that have not been found to provide adequate protection to such personal data, including the United States, and the efficacy and longevity of current transfer mechanisms between the EEA, and the United States remains uncertain. Case law from the Court of Justice of the European Union (“CJEU”) states that reliance on the standard contractual clauses - a standard form of contract approved by the European Commission as an adequate personal data transfer mechanism - alone may not necessarily be sufficient in all circumstances and that transfers must be assessed on a case-by-case basis. On July 10, 2023, the European Commission adopted its Adequacy Decision in relation to the new EU-US Data Privacy Framework (“DPF”), rendering the DPF effective as a GDPR transfer mechanism to U.S. entities self-certified under the DPF. Further, on October 12, 2023, the UK Extension to the DPF came into effect (as approved by the UK Government), as a data transfer mechanism from the UK to U.S. entities self-certified under the DPF. We expect the existing legal complexity and uncertainty regarding international personal data transfers to continue. In particular, we expect the DPF Adequacy Decision to be challenged and international transfers to the United States and to other jurisdictions more generally to continue to be subject to enhanced scrutiny by regulators. As a result, we may have to make certain operational changes and we will have to implement revised standard contractual clauses and other relevant documentation for existing data transfers within required time frames. / As supervisory authorities issue further guidance on personal data export mechanisms, including circumstances where the SCCs cannot be used, and/or start taking enforcement action, we could suffer additional costs, complaints and/or regulatory investigations or fines, and/or if we are otherwise unable to transfer personal data between and among countries and regions in which we operate, it could affect the manner in which we provide our services, the geographical location or segregation of our relevant systems and operations, and could adversely affect our financial results.

Previous wording

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a BLA, to market the same biologic for the same disease or condition for seven years, except in limited circumstances such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan product exclusivity or if FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can ensure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Even if we or our collaborators or licensees obtain orphan drug designation for a product candidate, we or they may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Exclusive marketing rights in the United States may be limited if we or our collaborators or licensees seek approval for a disease or condition broader than the orphan designated disease or condition and 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. Further, even if a product obtains orphan drug exclusivity, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs can be approved for the same condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug for the same condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is safer, more effective, or makes a major contribution to patient care. Furthermore, the FDA can waive orphan exclusivity if we or our collaborators or licensees are unable to manufacture sufficient supply of the product.

Current wording

If a product that has orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan product exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including a BLA, to market the same biologic for the same disease or condition for seven years, except in limited circumstances such as a showing of clinical superiority to the product with orphan product exclusivity or if FDA finds that the holder of the orphan drug exclusivity has not shown that it can ensure the availability of sufficient quantities of the orphan drug to meet the needs of patients with the disease or condition for which the drug was designated. Even if we or our collaborators or licensees obtain orphan drug designation for a product candidate, we or they may not be the first to obtain marketing approval for any particular orphan indication due to the uncertainties associated with developing pharmaceutical products. Exclusive marketing rights in the

Previous wording

Similarly, in the EU, a medicinal product may receive orphan designation from the European Commission after receiving the opinion of the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 141/2000. This applies to products (1) that are intended for a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; and (2) either (a) such condition affects not more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would be unlikely to generate sufficient returns in the EU to justify the necessary investment, and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU or, if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees, fee waivers, specific regulatory assistance and scientific advice, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a MA and assuming the requirements for orphan designation are also met at the time the marketing authorization is granted, orphan medicinal products are entitled to 10 years of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, during which time no similar medicinal product for the same indication may be placed on the market. An orphan product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the EU for complying with an agreed Pediatric Investigation Plan. However, the 10-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example, if the product is judged as sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity, or when the prevalence of the condition has increased above the orphan designation threshold. Additionally, marketing authorization may be granted to a similar product for the same indication at any time if:

Current wording

Similarly, in the EU, a medicinal product may receive orphan designation from the European Commission after receiving the opinion of the EMA’s Committee for Orphan Medicinal Products, under Article 3 of Regulation (EC) 141/2000. This applies to products (1) that are intended for a life-threatening or chronically debilitating condition; (2) either (a) such condition affects not more than five in 10,000 persons in the EU when the application is made, or (b) the product, without the benefits derived from orphan status, would be unlikely to generate sufficient returns in the EU to justify the necessary investment, and (3) there exists no satisfactory method of diagnosis, prevention or treatment of such condition authorized for marketing in the EU or, if such a method exists, the product will be of significant benefit to those affected by the condition. In the EU, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as reduction of fees, fee waivers, specific regulatory assistance and scientific advice, and access to the centralized marketing authorization procedure. Upon grant of a marketing authorization (“MA”) and assuming the requirements for orphan designation are also met at the time the MA is granted, orphan medicinal products are entitled to 10 years of market exclusivity for the approved therapeutic indication, during which time no similar medicinal product for the same indication may be placed on the market. An orphan product can also obtain an additional two years of market exclusivity in the EU for complying with an agreed Pediatric Investigation Plan (“PIP”). However, the 10-year market exclusivity may be reduced to six years if, at the end of the fifth year, it is established that the product no longer meets the criteria for orphan designation, for example, if the product is judged as sufficiently profitable not to justify maintenance of market exclusivity, or when the prevalence of the condition has increased above the orphan designation threshold. Additionally, MA may be granted to a similar product for the same indication at any time if:

Previous wording

Post-Brexit, the United Kingdom has retained the EU Regulation which governs the designation of medicinal products as orphan drugs and which establishes incentives thereto (Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000) as part of UK law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. However any future changes to the legal requirements could lead to greater regulatory complexity and increased costs to our business.

Current wording

Post-Brexit, the UK has retained the EU Regulation which governs the designation of medicinal products as orphan drugs and which establishes incentives thereto (Regulation (EC) No. 141/2000) as part of UK law by virtue of the European Union (Withdrawal) Act 2018. However any future changes to the legal requirements could lead to greater regulatory complexity and increased costs to our business.

Previous wording

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, collectively the ACA, was enacted in the United States. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our product candidates, the ACA established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents; increased the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs, expanded the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health program, addressed 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, created 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 manufacturer’s outpatient drugs to be covered under Medicare Part D, and created a licensure framework for follow-on biologic products.

Current wording

For example, in March 2010, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, collectively the ACA, was enacted in the United States. Among the provisions of the Affordable Care Act of importance to our product candidates, the ACA established an annual, nondeductible fee on any entity that manufactures or imports specified branded prescription drugs and biologic agents; increased the statutory minimum rebates a manufacturer must pay under the Medicaid Drug Rebate Program, extended manufacturers’ Medicaid rebate liability to covered drugs dispensed to individuals who are enrolled in Medicaid managed care organizations, expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs, expanded the entities eligible for discounts under the Public Health program, addressed 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, and created a licensure framework for follow-on biologic products.

Previous wording

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes include the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap beginning January 1, 2024. The rebate was previously capped at 100% of a drug's average manufacturer price.

Current wording

In addition, other legislative changes have been proposed and adopted since the ACA was enacted. These changes include the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021, which, effective January 1, 2024, eliminated the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, which was previously set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price.

Previous wording

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies, rebates and price negotiation for pharmaceutical products. Most recently, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”), was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (beginning in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. On August 29, 2023, HHS announced the list of the first ten drugs that will be subject to price negotiations. HHS has issued and will continue to issue guidance implementing the IRA, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. For that and other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product and medical device pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and medical devices to purchase and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs.

Current wording

Further, there has been heightened governmental scrutiny recently over pharmaceutical pricing practices in light of the rising cost of prescription drugs and biologics. Such scrutiny has resulted in several Congressional inquiries and proposed and enacted federal and state legislation designed to, among other things, bring more transparency to product pricing, review the relationship between pricing and manufacturer patient programs, and reform government program reimbursement methodologies, rebates and price negotiation for pharmaceutical products. Most recently, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022 (the “IRA”), was signed into law. Among other things, the IRA requires manufacturers of certain drugs to engage in price negotiations with Medicare (beginning in 2026), with prices that can be negotiated subject to a cap; imposes rebates under Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D to penalize price increases that outpace inflation (first due in 2023); and replaces the Part D coverage gap discount program with a new discounting program (which began in 2025). The IRA permits the Secretary of the HHS to implement many of these provisions through guidance, as opposed to regulation, for the initial years. HHS has issued and will continue to issue guidance implementing the IRA. CMS has published the negotiated prices for the initial 10 drugs, which will first be effective in 2026, and has published the list of the subsequent 15 drugs that will be subject to negotiation, although the Medicare drug price negotiation program is currently subject to legal challenges. For that and other reasons, it is currently unclear how the IRA will be effectuated. At the state level, legislatures have increasingly passed legislation and implemented regulations designed to control pharmaceutical product and medical device pricing, including price or patient reimbursement constraints, discounts, restrictions on certain product access and marketing cost disclosure and transparency measures, and, in some cases, designed to encourage importation from other countries and bulk purchasing. In addition, regional healthcare authorities and individual hospitals are increasingly using bidding procedures to determine what pharmaceutical products and medical devices to purchase and which suppliers will be included in their prescription drug and other healthcare programs.

Previous wording

The ability of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies, such as the EMA following its relocation to Amsterdam and resulting staff changes, may also slow the time necessary for new biologics or modifications to approved biologics to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, over the last several years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities.

Current wording

The ability of the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, statutory, regulatory and policy changes, the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept the payment of user fees, and other events that may otherwise affect the FDA’s or foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions. Average review times at the FDA and foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of other government agencies that fund research and development activities is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable. Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies, such as the EMA following its relocation to Amsterdam and resulting staff changes, may also slow the time necessary for new biologics or modifications to approved biologics to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. For example, in recent years, the U.S. government has shut down several times and certain regulatory agencies, such as the FDA, have had to furlough critical FDA employees and stop critical activities and the new Trump Administration could impose further regulatory reform efforts that could impact certain regulatory agencies, including the FDA. At this time, it is unclear exactly what impact, if any, such changes may have on our business.

Previous wording

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. Even though the FDA has since resumed standard inspection operations, any resurgence of the virus or emergence of new variants may lead to further inspectional or administrative delays. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

Separately, in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, the FDA postponed most inspections of domestic and foreign manufacturing facilities at various points. If a prolonged government shutdown occurs, or if renewed global health concerns prevent the FDA or other regulatory authorities from conducting their regular inspections, reviews or other regulatory activities, it could significantly impact the ability of the FDA or other regulatory authorities to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Previous wording

We focus some of our research and product development on treatments for rare genetic diseases. Our and our collaborators’ projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with product candidates we may develop, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect, and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients in the United States, Europe and elsewhere may turn out to be lower than expected, and patients may not be amenable to treatment with products that we may develop alone or with collaborators, or may become increasingly difficult to identify or gain access to, any of which would decrease our ability to realize revenue from any such products for such diseases.

Current wording

We focus some of our research and product development on treatments for rare genetic diseases. Our and our collaborators’ projections of both the number of people who have these diseases, as well as the subset of people with these diseases who have the potential to benefit from treatment with product candidates we may develop, are based on estimates. These estimates may prove to be incorrect, and new studies may change the estimated incidence or prevalence of these diseases. The number of patients in the United

Previous wording

If we are successful in achieving regulatory approval to commercialize any biologic product candidate we develop alone or with collaborators, it may face competition from biosimilar products. In the United States, our product candidates are regulated by the FDA as biologic products subject to approval under the BLA pathway. The BPCIA created an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biologic products following the approval of an original BLA. The abbreviated regulatory pathway establishes legal authority for the FDA to review and approve biosimilar biologics, including the possible designation of a biosimilar as “interchangeable” based on its similarity to an existing brand product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted 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 after the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. 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 the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product.

Current wording

If we are successful in achieving regulatory approval to commercialize any biologic product candidate we develop alone or with collaborators, it may face competition from biosimilar products. In the United States, our product candidates are regulated by the FDA as biologic products subject to approval under the BLA pathway. The Biologics Price Competition and Innovation Act of 2009 (the “BPCIA”) created an abbreviated pathway for the approval of biosimilar and interchangeable biologic products following the approval of an original BLA. The abbreviated regulatory pathway establishes legal authority for the FDA to review and approve biosimilar biologics, including the possible designation of a biosimilar as “interchangeable” based on its similarity to an existing brand product. Under the BPCIA, an application for a biosimilar product may not be submitted 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 after the reference product was first licensed by the FDA. 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 the sponsor’s own preclinical data and data from adequate and well-controlled clinical trials to demonstrate the safety, purity and potency of their product.

Previous wording

Jurisdictions in addition to the U.S. have established abbreviated pathways for regulatory approval of biological products that are biosimilar to earlier approved reference products. For example, the EU has had an established regulatory pathway for biosimilars since 2006.

Current wording

Jurisdictions in addition to the U.S. have established abbreviated pathways for regulatory approval of biological products that are biosimilar to earlier approved reference products. For example, the EU has had an established regulatory pathway for biosimilars since 2006. For such products, the results of appropriate preclinical or clinical trials must be provided, and guidelines from the EMA detail the type of quantity of supplementary data to be provided for different types of biological product. There are no such guidelines for complex biological products, such as gene or cell therapy medicinal products, and so it is unlikely that biosimilars of those products will currently be approved in the EU. However, guidance from the EMA states that they will be considered in the future in light of the scientific knowledge and regulatory experience gained at the time.

Previous wording

As of December 31, 2023, we had 109 full-time employees. Our future financial performance, ability to develop and commercialize product candidates alone or with collaborators and ability to compete effectively will depend in part on our ability to effectively manage the then applicable needs of our business. We may have difficulty identifying, hiring and integrating new personnel. Many of the biotechnology companies that we compete against for qualified personnel and consultants have greater financial and other resources, different risk profiles and a longer history than we do. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel and consultants, the rate and success at which we can identify and develop product candidates, enter into collaborative arrangements and otherwise operate our business will be limited.

Current wording

As of December 31, 2024, we had 108 full-time employees. Our future financial performance, ability to develop and commercialize product candidates alone or with collaborators and ability to compete effectively will depend in part on our ability to effectively manage the then applicable needs of our business. We may have difficulty identifying, hiring and integrating new personnel. Many of the biotechnology companies that we compete against for qualified personnel and consultants have greater financial and other resources (including the ability to offer greater cash and equity incentive compensation), different risk profiles and a longer history than we do. If we are unable to continue to attract and retain high-quality personnel and consultants, the rate and success at which we can identify and develop product candidates, enter into collaborative arrangements and otherwise operate our business will be limited.

Previous wording

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 404”) we are required to furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting. However, while we remain an emerging growth company and/or a smaller reporting company with less than $100 million in annual revenue in our last fiscal year, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. If we fail to implement the requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act in the required timeframe, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, including the SEC and Nasdaq. Furthermore, if we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, our investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities. Failure to implement or maintain an effective internal control system could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

Current wording

Pursuant to Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002 (“Section 404”) we are required to furnish a report by our management on our internal control over financial reporting. However, while we remain a non-accelerated filer within the meaning of the Exchange Act, we will not be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm. If we fail to implement the requirements of Section 404 in the required timeframe, we may be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities, including the SEC and Nasdaq. Furthermore, if we are unable to conclude that our internal control over financial reporting is effective, our investors may lose confidence in the accuracy and completeness of our financial reports, the market price of our common stock could decline, and we could be subject to sanctions or investigations by regulatory authorities. Failure to implement or maintain an effective internal control system could also restrict our future access to the capital markets.

Previous wording

We and certain of our service providers are from time to time, subject to cyberattacks and security incidents. While we do not believe that we have experienced any significant system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our or our critical third parties’ operations, it could result in delays and/or material disruptions of our research and development programs, our operations and ultimately, our financial results. For example, the loss of trial data from completed, ongoing or planned trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of personal, confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability due to delays in the development of our product candidates and/or due to reputational harm, litigation, regulatory investigations and enforcement, fines and penalties, or increased costs of compliance and system remediation. Any losses, costs or liabilities may not be covered by, or may exceed the coverage limits of, any or all applicable insurance policies.

Current wording

We and certain of our service providers are from time to time, subject to cyberattacks and security incidents. While we do not believe that we have experienced any material impact to our business strategy, results of operations, or financial condition resulting from a system failure, accident or security breach to date, if such an event were to occur and cause interruptions in our or our critical third parties’ operations, it could result in delays and/or material disruptions of our research and development programs, our operations and ultimately, our financial results. For example, the loss of trial data from completed, ongoing or planned trials could result in delays in our regulatory approval efforts and significantly increase our costs to recover or reproduce the data. To the extent that any disruption or security breach were to result in a loss of or damage to data or applications, or inappropriate disclosure of personal, confidential or proprietary information, we could incur liability due to delays in the development of our product candidates and/or due to reputational harm, litigation, regulatory investigations and enforcement, fines and penalties, or increased costs of compliance and system remediation. Any losses, costs or liabilities may not be covered by, or may exceed the coverage limits of, any or all applicable insurance policies.

Previous wording

We may not be able to utilize all of our net operating loss carryforwards.

Current wording

We may not be able to utilize all, or any, of our net operating loss carryforwards.

Previous wording

We have incurred substantial losses during our history, do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may not achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2023, we had U.S. federal and state net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards of $195.0 million and $166.8 million, respectively. Our federal NOL carryforwards carry forward indefinitely. Our state NOL carryforwards begin to expire in 2027. In addition, as of December 31, 2023, we have U.S. federal and state R&D tax credits of $17.2 million and an amount less than $0.1 million available to offset future U.S. federal and state income taxes, which begin to expire in 2029 and 2030, respectively. As of December 31, 2023, we had federal Orphan Drug credits of $13.5 million, which begin to expire in 2038.

Current wording

We have incurred substantial losses during our history, do not expect to become profitable in the near future, and we may not achieve profitability. As of December 31, 2024, we had U.S. federal and state net operating loss (“NOL”) carryforwards of $235.5 million and $212.0 million, respectively. Our federal NOL carryforwards carry forward indefinitely. Our state NOL carryforwards begin to expire in 2027. In addition, as of year ended December 31, 2024, we have U.S. federal and state R&D tax credits of $20.2 million and an amount less than $0.1 million available to offset future U.S. federal and state income taxes, which begin to expire in 2029 and 2030, respectively. Additionally, for the year ended December 31, 2024, we had federal Orphan Drug credits of $13.5 million, which begin to expire in 2038.

Previous wording

Changes in tax laws or regulations may adversely impact our ability to utilize all, or any, of our NOL carryforwards. For example, legislation enacted in 2017, informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”), significantly revised the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Future guidance from the IRS and other tax authorities with respect to the TCJA may affect us, and certain aspects of the TCJA could be repealed or modified in future legislation. For example, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) modified certain provisions of the TCJA. Under the CARES Act, NOLs arising in a tax year beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2021, generally may now be carried back five years. Under the TCJA, as modified by the CARES Act, unused losses generated in taxable years ending after December 31, 2017 will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such NOLs in tax years beginning after December 31, 2020, is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the to the TCJA or the CARES Act.

Current wording

Changes in tax laws or regulations may adversely impact our ability to utilize all, or any, of our NOL carryforwards. For example, legislation enacted in 2017, informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act (the “TCJA”), significantly revised the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”). Future guidance from the IRS and other tax authorities with respect to the TCJA may affect us, and certain aspects of the TCJA could be repealed or modified in future legislation. For example, the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (the “CARES Act”) modified certain provisions of the TCJA. Under the CARES Act, NOLs arising in a tax year beginning after December 31, 2017, and before January 1, 2021, generally may now be carried back five years. Under the TCJA, as modified by the CARES Act, unused losses generated in taxable years ending after December 31, 2017 will not expire and may be carried forward indefinitely, but the deductibility of such NOLs in tax years beginning after December 31, 2020, is limited to 80% of taxable income. It is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to the TCJA or the CARES Act.

Previous wording

We have sought in the past, and anticipate that we will continue to seek in the future, third-party collaborators for the research, development and commercialization of certain product candidates and the research and development of certain technologies. For example, we are party to the Prevail Agreement and Novartis Agreement. Under these agreements, we are focused on research and development ofin vivo gene editing products that utilize or incorporate our ARCUS nucleases. Our potential collaborators for other product research and development arrangements likely include large and mid-size pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and our potential collaborators for other technology research and development arrangements likely include universities and other research institutions.

Current wording

We have sought in the past, and anticipate that we will continue to seek in the future, third-party collaborators for the research, development and commercialization of certain product candidates and the research and development of certain technologies. For example, we are party to the Novartis Agreement. Under this agreement, we are focused on research and development ofin vivo gene editing products that utilize or incorporate our ARCUS nucleases. Our potential collaborators for other product research and development arrangements likely include large and mid-size pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies, and our potential collaborators for other technology research and development arrangements likely include universities and other research institutions.

Previous wording

Our ability to generate revenues from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. If our collaborations do not result in the successful development and commercialization of product candidates or technologies, or if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future funding or milestone or royalty payments under the collaboration. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these agreements, our development of product candidates or technologies could be delayed, and we may need additional resources to develop such product candidates or technologies. For example, we waived earned, but unpaid, milestone payments in connection with the termination of the Servier Agreement. If any of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may be unable to find a suitable replacement collaborator or attract new collaborators and may need to raise additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable product candidates or technologies. These events could delay development programs, negatively impact the perception of our company in business and financial communities or cause us to have to cease development of the product candidate covered by the collaboration arrangement. Failure to develop or maintain relationships with any current collaborators could result in the loss of opportunity to work with that collaborator or reputational damage that could impact our relationships with other collaborators in the relatively small industry communities in which we operate. Moreover, all of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K apply to the activities of our collaborators. If our existing collaboration agreements or any collaborative or strategic relationships we may establish in the future are not effective and successful, it may damage our reputation and business prospects, delay or prevent the development and commercialization of product candidates and inhibit or preclude our ability to realize any revenues.

Current wording

Our ability to generate revenues from these arrangements will depend on our collaborators’ abilities to successfully perform the functions assigned to them in these arrangements. If our collaborations do not result in the successful development and commercialization of product candidates or technologies, or if one of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may not receive any future funding or milestone or royalty payments under the collaboration. If we do not receive the funding we expect under these agreements, our development of product candidates or technologies could be delayed, and we may need additional resources to develop such product candidates or technologies. For example, we waived earned, but unpaid, milestone payments in connection with the termination of the development and commercial license agreement by and between Les Laboratoires Servier and Institut de Recherches Internationales, Servier (collectively “Servier”). If any of our collaborators terminates its agreement with us, we may be unable to find a suitable replacement collaborator or attract new collaborators and may need to raise additional capital to pursue further development or commercialization of the applicable product candidates or technologies. These events could delay development programs, negatively impact the perception of our company in business and financial communities or cause us to have to cease development of the product candidate covered by the collaboration arrangement. Failure to develop or maintain relationships with any current collaborators could result in the loss of opportunity to work with that collaborator or reputational damage that could impact our relationships with other collaborators in the relatively small industry communities in which we operate. Moreover, all of the risks relating to product development, regulatory approval and commercialization described in this Annual Report on Form 10-K apply to the activities of our collaborators. If our existing collaboration agreements or any collaborative or strategic relationships we may establish in the future are not effective and successful, it may damage our reputation and business prospects, delay or prevent the development and commercialization of product candidates and inhibit or preclude our ability to realize any revenues.

Previous wording

Our research and product development programs and the potential commercialization of any product candidates we develop alone or with collaborators will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses, and we expect continuing to seek collaborative arrangements with others in connection with the development and potential commercialization of current and future product candidates or the development of ancillary technologies. We face significant competition in establishing relationships with appropriate collaborators. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include, among other things and as applicable for the type of potential product or technology, an assessment of the opportunities and risks of our technology, the design or results of studies or trials, the likelihood of approval, if necessary, by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products and technologies and industry and market conditions generally.

Current wording

Our research and product development programs and the potential commercialization of any product candidates we develop alone or with collaborators will require substantial additional cash to fund expenses, and we expect to continue to seek collaborative arrangements with others in connection with the development and potential commercialization of current and future product candidates or the development of ancillary technologies. We face significant competition in establishing relationships with appropriate collaborators. In addition, there have been a significant number of recent business combinations among large pharmaceutical companies that have resulted in a reduced number of potential future collaborators. Whether we reach a definitive agreement for a collaboration will depend, among other things, upon our assessment of the collaborator’s resources and expertise, the terms and conditions of the proposed collaboration and the proposed collaborator’s evaluation of a number of factors. Those factors may include, among other things and as applicable for the type of potential product or technology, an assessment of the opportunities and risks of our technology, the design or results of studies or trials, the likelihood of approval, if necessary, by the FDA or similar regulatory authorities outside the United States, the potential market for the subject product candidate, the costs and complexities of manufacturing and delivering such product candidate to patients, the potential of competing products and technologies and industry and market conditions generally.

Previous wording

Current or future collaborators may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us. Additionally, we may be restricted under existing collaboration agreements from entering into future agreements on certain terms or for certain development activities with potential collaborators. For example, we have granted exclusive rights or options to Prevail and Novartis for certain targets, and during the term of our collaboration agreements we will be restricted from granting rights to other parties to use our ARCUS technology to pursue potential products that address those targets. Similarly, our collaboration agreements have in the past and may in the future contain non-competition provisions that could limit our ability to enter into strategic collaborations with future collaborators.

Current wording

Current or future collaborators may also consider alternative product candidates or technologies for similar indications that may be available to collaborate on and whether such a collaboration could be more attractive than the one with us. Additionally, we may be restricted under existing collaboration agreements from entering into future agreements on certain terms or for certain development activities with potential collaborators. For example, we have granted exclusive rights or options to Novartis for certain targets, and during the term of our collaboration agreements we will be restricted from granting rights to other parties to use our ARCUS technology to pursue potential products that address those targets. Similarly, our collaboration agreements have in the past and may in the future contain non-competition provisions that could limit our ability to enter into strategic collaborations with future collaborators.

Previous wording

Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we do enter into additional collaboration agreements, the negotiated terms may force us to relinquish rights that diminish our potential profitability from development and commercialization of the subject product candidates or others. If we are unable to enter into additional collaboration agreements, or to maintain existing collaborations, we may have to curtail the research and development of the product candidate or technology for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay research and development programs, delay potential commercialization timelines, reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities or undertake research, development or commercialization activities at our own expense. For example, in January 2023, we announced that, based on our new prioritized focus, as well as the evolving treatment paradigm for PH1, we have decided to look for a partner in the kidney disease arena for further potential development of PBGENE-PH1 and will no longer develop the program on its own. If we are unable to enter into an appropriate collaboration with respect to PH1 on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all, we may choose to cease related research and development activities. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund research, development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all.

Current wording

Collaborations are complex and time-consuming to negotiate and document. We may not be able to negotiate collaborations on a timely basis, on acceptable terms, or at all. If we do enter into additional collaboration agreements, the negotiated terms may force us to relinquish rights that diminish our potential profitability from development and commercialization of the subject product candidates or others. If we are unable to enter into additional collaboration agreements, or to maintain existing collaborations, we may have to curtail the research and development of the product candidate or technology for which we are seeking to collaborate, reduce or delay research and development programs, delay potential commercialization timelines, reduce the scope of any sales or marketing activities or undertake research, development or commercialization activities at our own expense. If we elect to increase our expenditures to fund research, development or commercialization activities on our own, we may need to obtain additional capital, which may not be available to us on acceptable terms or at all.

Previous wording

We are dependent on third parties for the supply of various biological materials, such as cells, cytokines and antibodies, and the manufacture of product supplies, such as media, plasmids, mRNA and AAV viral vectors, that are necessary to produce our product candidates. The supply of these materials could be reduced or interrupted at any time. In such case, identifying and engaging an alternative supplier or manufacturer could result in delay, and we may not be able to find other acceptable suppliers or manufacturers on acceptable terms, or at all. Switching suppliers or manufacturers may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines. If we change suppliers or manufacturers for commercial production, applicable regulatory agencies may require us to conduct additional studies or trials. If key suppliers or manufacturers are lost, or if the supply of the materials is diminished or discontinued, we or our collaborators may not be able to develop, manufacture and market product candidates in a timely and competitive manner, or at all. If any of our product candidates receives approval, we will likely need to seek alternative sources of supply of raw materials or manufactured product supplies and there can be no assurance that we will be able to establish such relationships to provide such supplies on commercially reasonable terms or at acceptable quality levels, if at all. If we are unable to identify and procure additional sources of supply that fit our required needs, we could face substantial delays or incur additional costs in procuring such materials. In addition, manufactured product supplies are subject to stringent manufacturing processes and rigorous testing. Delays in the completion and validation of facilities and manufacturing processes of these materials could adversely affect the ability to complete studies or trials and commercialize any product candidates that may receive approval. Furthermore, if our suppliers or manufacturers encounter challenges relating to employee turnover, the supply and manufacturing of our materials could be delayed or adversely affected as such parties seek to hire and train new employees. These factors could cause the delay of studies or trials, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of product candidates that we or our collaborators may develop, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing products successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers or manufacturers fail to meet contractual requirements, and we are unable to secure one or more replacements capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our or our collaborators’ studies or trials may be delayed and we could lose potential revenue.

Current wording

We are dependent on third parties for the supply of various biological materials, such as cells, cytokines and antibodies, and the manufacture of product supplies, such as media, plasmids, mRNA and AAV viral vectors, which are necessary to produce our product candidates. The supply of these materials could be reduced or interrupted at any time. In such case, identifying and engaging an alternative supplier or manufacturer could result in delay, and we may not be able to find other acceptable suppliers or manufacturers on acceptable terms, or at all. Switching suppliers or manufacturers may involve substantial costs and is likely to result in a delay in our desired clinical and commercial timelines. If we change suppliers or manufacturers for commercial production, applicable regulatory agencies may require us to conduct additional studies or trials. If key suppliers or manufacturers are lost, or if the supply of the materials is diminished or discontinued, we or our collaborators may not be able to develop, manufacture and market product candidates in a timely and competitive manner, or at all. If any of our product candidates receives approval, we will likely need to seek alternative sources of supply of raw materials or manufactured product supplies and there can be no assurance that we will be able to establish such relationships to provide such supplies on commercially reasonable terms or at acceptable quality levels, if at all. If we are unable to identify and procure additional sources of supply that fit our required needs, we could face substantial delays or incur additional costs in procuring such materials. In addition, manufactured product supplies are subject to stringent manufacturing processes and rigorous testing. Delays in the completion and validation of facilities and manufacturing processes of these materials could adversely affect the ability to complete studies or trials and commercialize any product candidates that may receive approval. Furthermore, if our suppliers or manufacturers encounter challenges relating to employee turnover, the supply and manufacturing of our materials could be delayed or adversely affected as such parties seek to hire and train new employees. These factors could cause the delay of studies or trials, regulatory submissions, required approvals or commercialization of product candidates that we or our collaborators may develop, cause us to incur higher costs and prevent us from commercializing products successfully. Furthermore, if our suppliers or manufacturers fail to meet contractual requirements, and we are unable to secure one or more replacements capable of production at a substantially equivalent cost, our or our collaborators’ studies or trials may be delayed and we could lose potential revenue.

Previous wording

We may continue to rely on third parties for at least a portion of the manufacturing process of product candidates, and failure by those parties to adequately perform their obligations could harm our business.

Current wording

We rely on third parties for the manufacturing process of product candidates, and failure by those parties to adequately perform their obligations could harm our business.