Upstream Bio, Inc.

Previous wording

We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. Verekitug is currently our only product candidate. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development of verekitug and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity (deficit) and working capital. Our net losses totaled $27.3 million and $10.9 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of March 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $218.1 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, verekitug in multiple indications.

Current wording

We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue from product sales to date. Verekitug is currently our only product candidate. We will continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our preclinical and clinical development of verekitug and ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred losses in each period since our inception. Net losses and negative cash flows have had, and will continue to have, an adverse effect on our stockholders’ equity (deficit) and working capital. Our net losses totaled $67.2 million and $25.6 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025 and 2024, respectively. As of June 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $258.0 million. We expect to continue to incur significant losses for the foreseeable future, and we expect these losses to increase as we continue our research and development of, and seek regulatory approvals for, verekitug in multiple indications.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2025, we had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments in the amount of $431.4 million. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through 2027. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could expend our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop verekitug. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Current wording

As of June 30, 2025, we had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments in the amount of $393.6 million. Based upon our current operating plan, we believe that our existing cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments will be sufficient to fund our operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements through 2027. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could expend our available capital resources sooner than we expect. We may also raise additional financing on an opportunistic basis in the future. For example, we may seek additional capital due to favorable market conditions or strategic considerations even if we believe we have sufficient funds for our current or future operating plans. Attempting to secure additional financing may divert our management from our day-to-day activities, which may adversely affect our ability to develop verekitug. Our future capital requirements will depend on many factors, including but not limited to:

Previous wording

We currently have a single product candidate, verekitug, which is in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of severe asthma and chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (“CRSwNP”), and we are initiating development of verekitug in chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (“COPD”). Our business presently depends entirely on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize verekitug for one or more of the indications that we are pursuing in a timely manner. This may make an investment in our company riskier than similar companies that have multiple product candidates in active development and may be able to better sustain the delay or failure of a lead product candidate.

Current wording

We currently have a single product candidate, verekitug, which is in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of severe asthma, chronic rhinosinusitis with nasal polyps (“CRSwNP”), and chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (“COPD”). Our business presently depends entirely on our ability to successfully develop, obtain regulatory approval for, and commercialize verekitug for one or more of the indications that we are pursuing in a timely manner. This may make an investment in our company riskier than similar companies that have multiple product candidates in active development and may be able to better sustain the delay or failure of a lead product candidate.

Previous wording

Our product candidate, verekitug, is in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of severe asthma and CRSwNP, and we are initiating development of verekitug in COPD. Our initial focus is on developing verekitug for the treatment of severe respiratory disorders.

Current wording

Our product candidate, verekitug, is in Phase 2 clinical development for the treatment of severe asthma, CRSwNP, and COPD. Our initial focus is on developing verekitug for the treatment of severe respiratory disorders.

Previous wording

Likewise, in the U.S., several states, including Colorado and California, passed laws that will take effect in 2026, to regulate various uses of artificial intelligence, including to make consequential decisions. In addition, various federal regulators have issued guidance and focused enforcement efforts on the use of AI in regulated sectors. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, for example, issued guidance on the use of artificial intelligence in medical devices, requiring detailed risk management and review processes to obtain approvals. If we develop or use AI systems governed by these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, monitoring and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements, with the potential for significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance.

Current wording

Likewise, recent state legislative developments in the United States have introduced emerging compliance risks for companies that develop or deploy AI technologies, which will impose novel requirements on AI developers and users. These state-level initiatives reflect a growing trend toward AI regulation in the absence of federal legislation. As a result, we may face a fragmented and evolving compliance landscape that could increase operational complexity, regulatory scrutiny, and legal exposure associated with the use or development of AI technologies. In addition, various federal regulators have issued guidance and focused enforcement efforts on the use of AI in regulated sectors. The U.S. Food and Drug Administration, for example, issued guidance on the use of AI in medical devices, requiring detailed risk management and review processes to obtain approvals. If we develop or use AI systems governed by these laws or regulations, we will need to meet higher standards of data quality, transparency, monitoring and human oversight, and we would need to adhere to specific and potentially burdensome and costly ethical, accountability, and administrative requirements, with the potential for significant enforcement or litigation in the event of any perceived non-compliance.

Previous wording

We currently rely on and engage third-party manufacturers to provide all of the APIs and the final drug product formulation of verekitug that is being used in our clinical trials and preclinical studies. Although we believe that there are several potential alternative manufacturers who could manufacture verekitug, we primarily rely on one manufacturer, WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited (“WuXi”), for the production of product necessary to complete our ongoing clinical trials. If a replacement manufacturer becomes necessary in the future, we may incur added costs and delays in identifying and qualifying another manufacturer. There have been Congressional legislative proposals, such as the bill titled the BIOSECURE Act, which would have, among other things, prohibited U.S. federal funding in connection with biotechnology equipment or services produced or provided by certain named Chinese “biotechnology companies of concern” (which includes WuXi) and loans and grants to, and federal contracts with any entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from one of these entities in performance of the government contract, grant, or loan. The legislation also would have given the federal government the authority to name additional “biotechnology companies of concern” that are engaged in research activities with the Chinese government and that pose a risk of U.S. national security. Although the BIOSECURE Act did not pass, if legislation similar to the BIOSECURE Act is proposed and enacted in the future, implementation of such law could materially impact our agreement with WuXi.

Current wording

We currently rely on and engage third-party manufacturers to provide all of the APIs and the final drug product formulation of verekitug that is being used in our clinical trials and preclinical studies, including WuXi Biologics (Hong Kong) Limited (“WuXi”). There have been Congressional legislative proposals, such as the bill titled the BIOSECURE Act, which would have, among other things, prohibited U.S. federal funding in connection with biotechnology equipment or services produced or provided by certain named Chinese “biotechnology companies of concern” (which includes WuXi) and loans and grants to, and federal contracts with any entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from one of these entities in performance of the government contract, grant, or loan. The legislation also would have given the federal government the authority to name additional “biotechnology companies of concern” that are engaged in research activities with the Chinese government and that pose a risk of U.S. national security. Although the BIOSECURE Act did not pass, if legislation similar to the BIOSECURE Act is proposed and enacted in the future, implementation of such law could materially impact our agreement with WuXi.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies, including substantial leadership departures, personnel cuts, and policy changes, may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. Changes and cuts in FDA staffing also could result in delays in the FDA’s responsiveness or in its ability to review IND submissions or applications, issue regulations or guidance, or implement or enforce regulatory requirements in a timely fashion or at all.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other government agencies, including substantial leadership departures, personnel cuts, and policy changes, may also slow the time necessary for new drugs to be reviewed and/or approved by necessary government agencies, which would adversely affect our business. Changes and cuts in FDA staffing have been reported by some within the pharmaceutical industry as creating instances of delays in the FDA’s responsiveness or in its ability to review IND submissions or applications, issue regulations or guidance, or implement or enforce regulatory requirements in a timely fashion.

Previous wording

The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments, and the prices of products have been a focus in this effort. There have been a number of federal and state proposals during the last few years regarding the pricing of pharmaceutical products, limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for drugs and other medical products, government control and other changes to the healthcare system in the United States. Governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products. Adoption of price controls and cost-containment measures, and adoption of more restrictive policies in jurisdictions with existing controls and measures, could further limit our revenue generated from the sale of any approved products.

Current wording

The containment of healthcare costs has become a priority of federal, state and foreign governments, and the prices of products have been a focus in this effort. There have been a number of federal and state proposals during the last few years regarding the pricing of pharmaceutical products, limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for drugs and other medical products, government control and other changes to the healthcare system in the United States. Governments have shown significant interest in implementing cost-containment programs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and requirements for substitution of generic products.

Previous wording

Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the individual EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This HTA of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States, can further reduce prices. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for biopharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimbursement levels within the country of publication and other countries. If pricing is set at unsatisfactory levels or if reimbursement of our products is unavailable or limited in scope or amount, our revenues from sales and the potential profitability of verekitug or any other potential future product candidates in those countries would be negatively affected.

Current wording

In addition, in some foreign countries, including some countries in the European Union, the proposed pricing for a product must be approved before it may be lawfully marketed. The requirements governing product pricing and reimbursement vary widely from country to country. The European Union provides options for its Member States to restrict the range of medicinal products for which their national health insurance systems provide reimbursement and to control the prices of medicinal products for human use. An EU Member State may approve a specific price for the medicinal product, it may refuse to reimburse a product at the price set by the manufacturer or it may instead adopt a system of direct or indirect controls on the profitability of the company placing the medicinal product on the market. Many EU Member States also periodically review their reimbursement procedures for medicinal products, which could have an adverse impact on reimbursement status. We expect that legislators, policymakers and healthcare insurance funds in the individual EU Member States will continue to propose and implement cost-containing measures, such as lower maximum prices, lower or lack of reimbursement coverage and incentives to use cheaper, usually generic, products as an alternative to branded products, and/or branded products available through parallel import to keep healthcare costs down. Moreover, in order to obtain reimbursement for our products in some European countries, including some EU Member States, we may be required to compile additional data comparing the cost-effectiveness of our products to other available therapies. This HTA of medicinal products is becoming an increasingly common part of the pricing and reimbursement procedures in some EU Member States, including those representing the larger markets. The HTA process is the procedure to assess therapeutic, economic and societal impact of a given medicinal product in the national healthcare systems of the individual country. The outcome of an HTA will often influence the pricing and reimbursement status granted to these medicinal products by the competent authorities of individual EU Member States. The extent to which pricing and reimbursement decisions are influenced by the HTA of the specific medicinal product currently varies between EU Member States. Reference pricing used by various EU Member States and parallel distribution, or arbitrage between low-priced and high-priced EU Member States, can further reduce prices. There can be no assurance that any country that has price controls or reimbursement limitations for biopharmaceutical products will allow favorable reimbursement and pricing arrangements for any of our products. Historically, products launched in the European Union do not follow price structures of the United States and generally prices tend to be significantly lower. Publication of discounts by third-party payors or authorities may lead to further pressure on the prices or reimburs…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Our business could be adversely affected by unstable economic and political conditions within the United States and foreign jurisdictions, including as a result of an economic downturn and geopolitical events, such as changes in U.S. federal policy that affect the geopolitical landscape. Changes to U.S. policy implemented by the U.S. Congress, the Trump administration or any new administration have impacted and may in the future impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade relations, unemployment, immigration, healthcare, taxation, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas. Since the start of the Trump administration in 2025, U.S. policy changes have been implemented at a rapid pace and additional changes are likely. The United States has recently imposed blanket 10% tariffs on virtually all imports to the U.S. and significantly higher so-called reciprocal tariffs applicable to imports from many countries. On April 9, 2025, the U.S. announced a temporary pause on its reciprocal tariffs applicable to many countries, while increasing the tariffs applicable to imports from China. The Trump administration has threatened to continue to broadly impose tariffs, which could lead to corresponding punitive actions by the countries with which the U.S. trades. Historically, tariffs have led to increased trade and political tensions, between not only the U.S. and China, but also between the U.S. and other countries in the international community. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. Any changes in political, trade, regulatory, and economic conditions, including U.S. trade policies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Until we know what policy changes are made, whether those policy changes are challenged and subsequently upheld by the court system and how those changes impact our business and the business of our competitors over the long term, we will not know if, overall, we will benefit from them or be negatively affected by them.

Current wording

Our business could be adversely affected by unstable economic and political conditions within the United States and foreign jurisdictions, including as a result of an economic downturn and geopolitical events, such as changes in U.S. federal policy that affect the geopolitical landscape. Changes to U.S. policy implemented by the U.S. Congress or U.S. presidential administrations have impacted and may in the future impact, among other things, the U.S. and global economy, international trade relations, unemployment, immigration, healthcare, taxation, the U.S. regulatory environment, inflation and other areas. Since the start of the most recent U.S. presidential administration in 2025, U.S. policy changes have been implemented at a rapid pace and additional changes are likely. For example, the implementation of tariffs by the U.S. government has led to increased trade and political tensions, between not only the U.S. and China, but also between the U.S. and other countries in the international community. In response to tariffs, other countries have implemented retaliatory tariffs on U.S. goods. Political tensions as a result of trade policies could reduce trade volume, investment, technological exchange and other economic activities between major international economies, resulting in a material adverse effect on global economic conditions and the stability of global financial markets. Any changes in political, trade, regulatory, and economic conditions, including U.S. trade policies, could have a material adverse effect on our financial condition or results of operations. Until we know what policy changes are made, whether those policy changes are challenged and subsequently upheld by the court system and how those changes impact our business and the business of our competitors over the long term, we will not know if, overall, we will benefit from them or be negatively affected by them.

Previous wording

Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by “5 percent shareholders” over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. A corporation that experiences an ownership change will generally be subject to an annual limitation on the use of its pre-ownership change NOLs equal to the value of the corporation immediately before the ownership change, multiplied by the long-term tax-exempt rate (subject to certain adjustments). We may have experienced ownership changes in the past and may experience ownership changes in the future. There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs by federal or state taxing authorities or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to reduce future income tax liabilities. As a result, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs and tax credits to offset future taxable income, if any, could be subject to limitations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply. As a result, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and tax credits.

Current wording

Under Sections 382 and 383 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended (the “Code”), if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change,” generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in its equity ownership by “5 percent shareholders” over a three-year period, the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change NOLs and other pre-change tax attributes (such as research and development tax credits) to offset its post-change income or taxes may be limited. A corporation that experiences an ownership change will generally be subject to an annual limitation on the use of its pre-ownership change NOLs equal to the value of the corporation immediately before the ownership change, multiplied by the long-term tax-exempt rate (subject to certain adjustments). We may have experienced ownership changes in the past and may experience ownership changes in the future. There is also a risk that due to regulatory changes, such as suspensions on the use of NOLs by federal or state taxing authorities or other unforeseen reasons, our existing NOLs could expire or otherwise be unavailable to reduce future income tax liabilities. As a result, our ability to use our pre-change NOLs and tax credits to offset future taxable income, if any, could be subject to limitations. Similar provisions of state tax law may also apply. As a result, even if we attain profitability, we may be unable to use a material portion of our NOLs and tax credits.

Previous wording

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application), including with respect to net operating losses and research and development tax credits, could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. In recent years, many such changes have been made and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. Future changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. We urge investors to consult with their legal and tax advisers regarding the implications of potential changes in tax laws on an investment in our common stock.

Current wording

The rules dealing with U.S. federal, state, and local income taxation are constantly under review by persons involved in the legislative process and by the U.S. Internal Revenue Service and the U.S. Treasury Department. Changes to tax laws (which changes may have retroactive application), including with respect to net operating losses and research and development tax credits, could adversely affect us or holders of our common stock. For example, the OBBBA was signed into law on July 4, 2025 and made significant changes to U.S. federal tax law. Under Section 174 of the Code, in taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed outside the U.S. will be capitalized and amortized, which may have an adverse effect on our cash flow. The OBBBA provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2024, expenses that are incurred for research and development performed in the U.S. may, at the taxpayer’s election, be immediately deducted or capitalized and amortized. In addition, the OBBBA provides that for taxable years beginning after December 31, 2021 and before January 1, 2025, certain eligible taxpayers generally may elect to retroactively deduct expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years by filing amended tax returns for such taxable years, and all other taxpayers that are not eligible to make such an election and that amortized expenses for research and development performed in the U.S. in such taxable years generally may elect to accelerate and deduct the remaining unamortized amounts of such research and development expenses (i) in the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024, or (ii) ratably over the two-taxable year period beginning with the first taxable year beginning after December 31, 2024. In recent years, many changes to tax laws have been made and changes are likely to continue to occur in the future. Future changes in tax laws could have a material adverse effect on our business, cash flow, financial condition or results of operations. We urge investors to consult with their legal and tax advisers regarding the implications of potential changes in tax laws on an investment in our common stock.