Immunome Inc.

Previous wording

We are a biotechnology company with a history of losses. Since our inception, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to research and development, raising capital, pursuing strategic transactions, building our management team and building our intellectual property portfolio, and we have incurred significant operating losses. As of March 31, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $557.4 million. Our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2024 was $293.0 million and $41.6 million for the three months ended March 31, 2025. To date, we have not generated any revenue from product sales, and we have not identified or sought or obtained regulatory approval for the marketing or sale of any product. Furthermore, we may not generate any revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future, and we expect to continue to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future due to the cost of research and development activities and the regulatory approval process for our programs and product candidates.

Current wording

We are a biotechnology company with a history of losses. Since our inception, we have devoted substantially all of our resources to research and development, raising capital, pursuing strategic transactions, building our management team and building our intellectual property portfolio, and we have incurred significant operating losses. As of June 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $600.8 million. Our net loss for the year ended December 31, 2024 was $293.0 million and $85.0 million for the six months ended June 30, 2025. To date, we have not generated any revenue from product sales, and we have not identified or sought or obtained regulatory approval for the marketing or sale of any product. Furthermore, we may not generate any revenue from product sales for the foreseeable future, and we expect to continue to incur significant operating losses for the foreseeable future due to the cost of research and development activities and the regulatory approval process for our programs and product candidates.

Previous wording

With respect to varegacestat, we expect to compete with companies advancing treatments for desmoid tumors, including SpringWorks Therapeutics, Inc. In November 2023, SpringWorks received FDA approval for its oral gamma secretase inhibitor, OGSIVEO® (nirogacestat), for the treatment of adult patients with progressing tumors who require systemic treatment. Desmoid tumor treatments also include surgery, hormonal therapy, cryotherapy, targeted therapy and chemotherapy. In April 2025, Merck KGaA announced a definitive agreement to acquire SpringWorks. We cannot predict the nature or extent of any impact that an acquisition of SpringWorks, if consummated, would have on the competitive landscape for varegacestat.

Current wording

With respect to varegacestat, we expect to compete with companies advancing treatments for desmoid tumors, including SpringWorks Therapeutics, Inc. In November 2023, SpringWorks received FDA approval for its oral gamma secretase inhibitor, OGSIVEO® (nirogacestat), for the treatment of adult patients with progressing tumors who require systemic treatment. Desmoid tumor treatments also include surgery, hormonal therapy, cryotherapy, targeted therapy and chemotherapy. In July 2025, Merck KGaA announced the closing of the acquisition of SpringWorks. We cannot predict the nature or extent of any impact that this acquisition of SpringWorks will have on the competitive landscape for varegacestat.

Previous wording

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate biologics or drugs designed to address relatively small patient populations as “orphan drugs.” Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is defined as one occurring in a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States, where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug or biologic will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding for clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product candidate that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including an NDA, to market the same drug 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 drug exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity.

Current wording

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate biologics or drugs designed to address relatively small patient populations as “orphan drugs.” Under the Orphan Drug Act, the FDA may grant orphan drug designation to a drug or biologic intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is defined as occurring in a patient population of fewer than 200,000 in the United States, or a patient population greater than 200,000 in the United States, where there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug or biologic will be recovered from sales in the United States. In the United States, orphan designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding for clinical trial costs, tax advantages and user-fee waivers. In addition, if a product candidate that has orphan designation subsequently receives the first FDA approval for the disease or condition for which it has such designation, the product is entitled to orphan drug exclusivity, which means that the FDA may not approve any other applications, including an NDA, to market the same drug 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 drug exclusivity or where the manufacturer is unable to assure sufficient product quantity.

Previous wording

In November 2023, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to varegacestat for the treatment of desmoid tumors, and we may seek additional Orphan Drug Designations for our other product candidates. There can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain such designations. Even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain orphan drug designation for a product candidate, we, or they, may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for that product candidate. Further, even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active ingredients may be approved for the same disease or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug or biologic for the same disease or condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care, or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

Current wording

In November 2023, the FDA granted Orphan Drug Designation to varegacestat for the treatment of desmoid tumors and the EMA granted this designation in July 2025, and we may seek additional Orphan Drug Designations for our other product candidates. There can be no assurances that we will be able to obtain such designations. Even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain orphan drug designation for a product candidate, we, or they, may not be able to obtain or maintain orphan drug exclusivity for that product candidate. Further, even if we, or any future collaborators, obtain orphan drug exclusivity for a product, that exclusivity may not effectively protect the product from competition because different drugs with different active ingredients may be approved for the same disease or condition. Even after an orphan drug is approved, the FDA can subsequently approve the same drug or biologic for the same disease or condition if the FDA concludes that the later drug is clinically superior in that it is shown to be safer, more effective or makes a major contribution to patient care, or the manufacturer of the product with orphan exclusivity is unable to maintain sufficient product quantity. Orphan drug designation neither shortens the development or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug or biologic any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process.

Previous wording

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad, particularly given the recent change in administration. The current Trump administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. These actions include, for example, directives to reduce agency workforce, program cuts, rescinding a Biden administration executive order tasking the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending and eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establishing an AI task force and developing a strategic plan, directing HHS to lower prescription drug costs for Medicare through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Negotiation Program, and directing certain federal agencies to enforce existing law regarding hospital and plan price transparency and by standardizing prices across hospitals and health plans. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to current regulations and guidance issued by federal agencies applicable to our operations, including those issued by the FDA. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA. We expect that additional state and federal health care reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for health care products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures, or otherwise adversely impact our operations.

Current wording

We cannot predict the likelihood, nature or extent of government regulation that may arise from future legislation or administrative or executive action, either in the United States or abroad, particularly given the recent change in administration. The current Trump administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government including at HHS, the FDA, CMS and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. These actions include, for example, (1) directives to reduce agency workforce, program cuts; (2) rescinding a Biden administration executive order tasking the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending; (3) eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establishing an AI task force and developing a strategic plan, directing HHS to lower prescription drug costs for Medicare through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Negotiation Program, and establishing Most-Favored-Nation pricing for pharmaceutical products; (5) imposing tariffs of imported pharmaceutical products; and (6) directing certain federal agencies to enforce existing law regarding hospital and plan price transparency and by standardizing prices across hospitals and health plans. Additionally, in its June 2024 decision in Loper Bright Enterprises v. Raimondo, the U.S. Supreme Court overturned the longstanding Chevron doctrine, under which courts were required to give deference to regulatory agencies’ reasonable interpretations of ambiguous federal statutes. The Loper Bright decision could result in additional legal challenges to current regulations and guidance issued by federal agencies applicable to our operations, including those issued by the FDA. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program created under the IRA. We expect that additional state and federal health care reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that federal and state governments will pay for health care products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures, or otherwise adversely impact our operations.

Previous wording

Once an NDA is approved, the product covered thereby becomes a “reference listed drug” in the FDA’s publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” commonly known as the Orange Book. Manufacturers may seek approval of generic versions of reference listed drugs through submission of abbreviated new drug applications, or ANDAs, in the United States. In support of an ANDA, a generic manufacturer need not conduct clinical trials to assess safety and efficacy. Rather, the sponsor generally must show that its product has the same active ingredient(s), dosage form, strength, route of administration and conditions of use or labelling as the reference listed drug and that the generic version is bioequivalent to the reference listed drug, meaning it is absorbed in the body at the same rate and to the same extent. Generic products may be significantly less costly to bring to market than the reference listed drug and companies that produce generic products are generally able to offer them at lower prices. Thus, following the introduction of a generic drug, a significant percentage of the sales of any branded product or reference listed drug is typically lost to the generic product.

Current wording

Once an NDA is approved, the product covered thereby becomes a “reference listed drug” in the FDA’s publication, “Approved Drug Products with Therapeutic Equivalence Evaluations,” commonly known as the Orange Book. Manufacturers may seek approval of generic versions of reference listed drugs through submission of abbreviated new drug applications, or ANDAs, in the United States. In support of an ANDA, a generic manufacturer need not conduct clinical trials to assess safety and efficacy. Rather, the sponsor generally must show that its product has the same active ingredient(s), dosage form, strength, route of administration and conditions of use or labeling as the reference listed drug and that the generic version is bioequivalent to the reference listed drug, meaning it is absorbed in the body at the same rate and to the same extent. Generic products may be significantly less costly to bring to market than the reference listed drug and companies that produce generic products are generally able to offer them at lower prices. Thus, following the introduction of a generic drug, a significant percentage of the sales of any branded product or reference listed drug is typically lost to the generic product.

Previous wording

We currently rely, and intend to continue to rely, on third-party contract manufacturers for our preclinical and clinical trial product materials and commercial supplies, including for our Phase 3 clinical trial of varegacestat and our Phase 1 clinical trials of IM-1021 and IM-3050. We do not intend to produce any meaningful quantity of materials needed for preclinical and clinical development through our internal resources, and we do not currently own manufacturing facilities for producing such supplies. While we intend to try to avoid sole-source arrangements with any of our manufacturing, supply and testing vendors, it may not always be possible to do so. We cannot assure you that our preclinical or future clinical development product supplies and commercial supplies will not be limited or interrupted, especially with respect to any sole source third-party manufacturing and supply partners or will be of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements.

Current wording

We currently rely, and intend to continue to rely, on third-party contract manufacturers for all of our preclinical and clinical trial product materials and commercial supplies, including for our Phase 3 clinical trial of varegacestat and our Phase 1 clinical trials of IM-1021, IM-3050, IM-1617, IM-1340 and IM-1335. We do not intend to produce any meaningful quantity of materials needed for preclinical and clinical development through our internal resources, and we do not currently own manufacturing facilities for producing such supplies. While we intend to try to avoid sole-source arrangements with any of our manufacturing, supply and testing vendors, it may not always be possible to do so. We cannot assure you that our preclinical or future clinical development product supplies and commercial supplies will not be limited or interrupted, especially with respect to any sole source third-party manufacturing and supply partners or will be of satisfactory quality or continue to be available at acceptable prices. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements.

Previous wording

In addition to challenges during litigation, third parties can challenge the validity of our patents in the United States using post-grant review andinter partes review proceedings, which some third parties have been using to cause the cancellation of selected or all claims of issued patents of competitors. For a patent filed March 16, 2013 or later, a petition for post-grant review can be filed by a third party in a nine-month window from issuance of the patent. For a patent filed before March 16, 2013, a petition forinter partes review can be filed immediately following the issuance of the patent. A petition forinter partes review can be filed after the nine-month period for filing a post-grant review petition has expired for a patent with an effective filing date of March 16, 2013 or later. Post-grant review proceedings can be brought on any ground of invalidity, whereasinter partes review proceedings can only raise an invalidity challenge based on published prior art and patents. These adversarial actions at the USPTO review patent claims without the presumption of validity afforded to U.S. patents in lawsuits in U.S. federal courts and use a lower burden of proof than used in litigation in U.S. federal courts. Therefore, it is generally considered easier for a competitor or third party to have a U.S. patent invalidated in a USPTO post-grant review orinter partes review proceeding than invalidated in a litigation in a U.S. federal court. If any of our patents are challenged by a third party in such a USPTO proceeding, there is no guarantee that we will be successful in defending the patent, which may result in a loss of the challenged patent right to us.

Current wording

In addition to challenges during litigation, third parties can challenge the validity of our patents in the United States using post-grant review andinter partes review proceedings, which some third parties have been using to cause the cancellation of selected or all claims of issued patents of competitors. For a patent filed March 16, 2013 or later, a petition for post-grant review can be filed by a third party in a nine-month window from issuance of the patent. For a patent filed before March 16, 2013, a petition forinter partes review can be filed immediately following the issuance of the patent. A petition forinter partes review can be filed after the nine-month period for filing a post-grant review petition has expired for a patent with an effective filing date of March 16, 2013 or later. Post-grant review proceedings can be brought on any ground of invalidity, whereas inter partes review proceedings can only raise an invalidity challenge based on published prior art and patents. These adversarial actions at the USPTO review patent claims without the presumption of validity afforded to U.S. patents in lawsuits in U.S. federal courts and use a lower burden of proof than used in litigation in U.S. federal courts. Therefore, it is generally considered easier for a competitor or third party to have a U.S. patent invalidated in a USPTO post-grant review orinter partes review proceeding than invalidated in a litigation in a U.S. federal court. If any of our patents are challenged by a third party in such a USPTO proceeding, there is no guarantee that we will be successful in defending the patent, which may result in a loss of the challenged patent right to us.

Previous wording

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years; these cases often narrow the scope of patent protection available to inventions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical spaces. For example, inAssociation for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., orMyriad, the Supreme Court ruled that a “naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated,” and invalidated Myriad Genetics’ claims on the isolated BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. To the extent that any of our patent application claims are deemed to be directed to natural products, or to lack an inventive concept above and beyond an isolated natural product, a court may decide the claims are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter and are invalid. The application ofMyriad to biotechnology inventions has continued to develop and may continue to change over time. Subsequent rulings in cases or guidance or procedures issued by the USPTO relating to patent eligibility may have a negative impact on our business.

Current wording

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled on several patent cases in recent years; these cases often narrow the scope of patent protection available to inventions in the biotechnology and pharmaceutical spaces. For example, in Association for Molecular Pathology v. Myriad Genetics, Inc., or Myriad, the Supreme Court ruled that a “naturally occurring DNA segment is a product of nature and not patent eligible merely because it has been isolated,” and invalidated Myriad Genetics’ claims on the isolated BRCA1 and BRCA2 genes. To the extent that any of our patent application claims are deemed to be directed to natural products, or to lack an inventive concept above and beyond an isolated natural product, a court may decide the claims are directed to patent-ineligible subject matter and are invalid. The application of Myriad to biotechnology inventions has continued to develop and may continue to change over time. Subsequent rulings in cases or guidance or procedures issued by the USPTO relating to patent eligibility may have a negative impact on our business.

Previous wording

InAmgen Inc. v. Sanofi, orAmgen, the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain of Amgen’s patent claims defined a class of antibodies by their function of binding to a particular antigen. The Court further wrote that because the patent claims defined the claimed class of antibodies only by their function of binding to a particular antigen, a skilled artisan would have to use significant trial and error to identify and make all the molecules in that class. The Court ultimately held that Amgen failed to properly enable its patent claims. Certain claims of our patent portfolio relate to broad classes of therapeutic agents, antibodies or antigen binding fragments. To the extent that a court finds that the skilled artisan would need significant trial and error to identify all the species in that class, the court may find the claims invalid underAmgen. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

Current wording

In Amgen Inc. v. Sanofi, or Amgen, the U.S. Supreme Court held that certain of Amgen’s patent claims defined a class of antibodies by their function of binding to a particular antigen. The Court further wrote that because the patent claims defined the claimed class of antibodies only by their function of binding to a particular antigen, a skilled artisan would have to use significant trial and error to identify and make all the molecules in that class. The Court ultimately held that Amgen failed to properly enable its patent claims. Certain claims of our patent portfolio relate to broad classes of therapeutic agents, antibodies or antigen binding fragments. To the extent that a court finds that the skilled artisan would need significant trial and error to identify all the species in that class, the court may find the claims invalid under Amgen. Depending on future actions by the U.S. Congress, the U.S. courts, the USPTO and the relevant law-making bodies in other countries, the laws and regulations governing patents could change in unpredictable ways that would weaken our ability to obtain new patents or to enforce our existing patents and patents that we might obtain in the future.

Previous wording

As of March 31, 2025, we had 131 full-time employees. The continued operation of our business and execution of our plans will require material additional staffing within the next twelve months. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to hire or retain adequate staffing levels to advance our ADC platform, develop our programs or product candidates or run our operations or to accomplish our objectives.

Current wording

As of June 30, 2025, we had 155 full-time employees. The continued operation of our business and execution of our plans will require material additional staffing within the next twelve months. We cannot provide assurance that we will be able to hire or retain adequate staffing levels to advance our ADC platform, develop our programs or product candidates or run our operations or to accomplish our objectives.

Previous wording

We expect that significant additional capital may be needed in the future to continue our planned operations, including further development of our programs and product candidates, preparing IND filings, conducting clinical trials, commercialization efforts, expanded research and development activities and costs associated with operating a public company. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, preferred stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. In this regard, in October 2023, we completed our Merger and concurrent PIPE transaction for gross proceeds of approximately $125.0 million before deducting fees and offering expenses. An aggregate of 21,690,871 shares of our common stock at $5.75 per share were issued pursuant to the subscription agreements and have been registered for resale pursuant to a registration statement on Form S-3 filed with the SEC and made effective on November 27, 2023. Additionally, in February 2024, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3, pursuant to which we have, and may in the future issue from time-to-time securities in one or more offerings at prices and terms to be determined at the time of sale. For example, in February 2024 and January 2025, we raised $230.0 million and $172.5 million, respectively, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us, through the public offering of our common stock. In connection with the closing of the public offerings, we issued and sold 11,500,000 shares of our common stock in February 2024 and 22,258,064 shares of our common stock in January 2025. In May 2024, we also entered into the 2024 ATM Agreement with TD Cowen, pursuant to which we may offer and sell, from time to time through TD Cowen, at our option, shares of our common stock. As of the filing of this Annual Report, we have sold 2,030,431 shares of our common stock for gross proceeds of approximately $20.0 million pursuant to the 2024 ATM Agreement and approximately $180.0 million remains available for future sales. If we sell shares of common stock, preferred stock, convertible securities or other equity securities, including pursuant to sales under the 2024 ATM Agreement, investors may be materially diluted. Such sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights, preferences and privileges senior to the holders of our common stock.

Current wording

We expect that significant additional capital may be needed in the future to continue our planned operations, including further development of our programs and product candidates, preparing IND filings, conducting clinical trials, commercialization efforts, expanded research and development activities and costs associated with operating a public company. To raise capital, we may sell common stock, preferred stock, convertible securities or other equity securities in one or more transactions at prices and in a manner we determine from time to time. In this regard, in October 2023, we completed our Merger and concurrent PIPE transaction for gross proceeds of approximately $125.0 million before deducting fees and offering expenses. An aggregate of 21,690,871 shares of our common stock at $5.75 per share were issued pursuant to the subscription agreements and have been registered for resale pursuant to a registration statement on Form S-3 filed with the SEC and made effective on November 27, 2023. Additionally, in February 2024, we filed an automatic shelf registration statement on Form S-3, pursuant to which we have, and may in the future issue from time-to-time securities in one or more offerings at prices and terms to be determined at the time of sale. For example, in February 2024 and January 2025, we raised $230.0 million and $172.5 million, respectively, before deducting underwriting discounts and commissions and estimated offering expenses payable by us, through the public offering of our common stock. In connection with the closing of the public offerings, we issued and sold 11,500,000 shares of our common stock in February 2024 and 22,258,064 shares of our common stock in January 2025. In May 2024, we also entered into the 2024 ATM Agreement with TD Cowen, pursuant to which we may offer and sell, from time to time through TD Cowen, at our option, shares of our common stock. As of the filing of this Quarterly Report, we have sold 2,030,431 shares of our common stock for gross proceeds of approximately $20.0 million pursuant to the 2024 ATM Agreement and approximately $180.0 million remains available for future sales. If we sell shares of common stock, preferred stock, convertible securities or other equity securities, including pursuant to sales under the 2024 ATM Agreement, investors may be materially diluted. Such sales may also result in material dilution to our existing stockholders, and new investors could gain rights, preferences and privileges senior to the holders of our common stock.

Previous wording

We issued 2,298,586 shares to Zentalis in connection with the Zentalis License Agreement, 2,175,489 shares to Ayala in connection with the Ayala Asset Purchase Agreement, 230,415 shares to BMS in connection with the BMS License Agreement Amendment and 1,805,502 shares to Zentalis in connection with the Zentalis Asset Purchase, all of which are registered for resale on Forms S-3 filed with the SEC in April 2024, October 2024 and November 2024, respectively. The shares issued to Zentalis in October 2024 are subject a to a six-month lock-up with respect to half of the shares. The shares issued to Ayala in April 2024 and Zentalis in October 2024 are subject to an orderly market disposition for one year from the date of issuance. Notwithstanding these contractual protections, any sales of these shares may cause our stock price to fall.

Current wording

We issued 2,298,586 shares to Zentalis in connection with the Zentalis License Agreement, 2,175,489 shares to Ayala in connection with the Ayala Asset Purchase Agreement, 230,415 shares to BMS in connection with the BMS License Agreement Amendment and 1,805,502 shares to Zentalis in connection with the Zentalis Asset Purchase, all of which are registered for resale on Forms S-3 filed with the SEC in April 2024, October 2024 and November 2024, respectively. The shares issued to Zentalis in October 2024 are subject to an orderly market disposition for one year from the date of issuance. Any sales of these shares may cause our stock price to fall.

Previous wording

Pursuant to our 2020 Equity Incentive Plan, or 2020 Plan, our board of directors or committee thereof or, in accordance with applicable law, designated members of management are authorized to grant stock options to our employees, directors and consultants. In addition, pursuant to our 2024 Inducement Plan, as amended, our board of directors, or a committee thereof, is authorized to grant inducement awards to new hires as a material inducement to their employment with us. The aggregate number of shares of our common stock that may be issued pursuant to stock awards under our 2020 Plan as of March 31, 2025 shall not exceed 10,774,732 shares, and the aggregate number of shares of our common stock that may be issued pursuant to stock awards under our 2024 Inducement Plan shall not exceed 3,500,000 shares.

Current wording

Pursuant to our 2020 Equity Incentive Plan, or 2020 Plan, our board of directors or committee thereof or, in accordance with applicable law, designated members of management are authorized to grant stock options to our employees, directors and consultants. In addition, pursuant to our 2024 Inducement Plan, as amended, our board of directors, or a committee thereof, is authorized to grant inducement awards to new hires as a material inducement to their employment with us. The aggregate number of shares of our common stock that may be issued pursuant to stock awards under our 2020 Plan as of June 30, 2025 shall not exceed 10,774,732 shares, and the aggregate number of shares of our common stock that may be issued pursuant to stock awards under our 2024 Inducement Plan, as amended, shall not exceed 3,500,000 shares.

Previous wording

We are an “emerging growth company” and our election of reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.

Current wording

We currently are an “emerging growth company” and our election of reduced reporting requirements applicable to emerging growth companies may make our common stock less attractive to investors.*

Previous wording

We are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in this Annual Report and our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, as an emerging growth company, we are only required to provide two years of audited financial statements and two years of selected financial data in this Annual Report. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years following the completion of our initial public offering, although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer,” which occurs when the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30, or if we have total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion or more during any fiscal year before that time, in which cases we would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31, or if we issue more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during any three-year period before that time, in which case we would no longer be an emerging growth company immediately. Even after we no longer qualify as an emerging growth company, we could still qualify as a “smaller reporting company,” which would allow us to take advantage of many of the same exemptions from disclosure requirements including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 and reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in this Annual Report and our other periodic reports and proxy statements. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our share price may be more volatile.

Current wording

We currently are an “emerging growth company” as defined in the Jumpstart Our Business Startups Act, or JOBS Act. For as long as we continue to be an emerging growth company, we may take advantage of exemptions from various reporting requirements that are applicable to other public companies that are not emerging growth companies, including not being required to comply with the auditor attestation requirements of Section 404 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, or Section 404, reduced disclosure obligations regarding executive compensation in our annual report and our periodic reports and proxy statements and exemptions from the requirements of holding a nonbinding advisory vote on executive compensation and stockholder approval of any golden parachute payments not previously approved. In addition, as an emerging growth company, we are only required to provide two years of audited financial statements and two years of selected financial data in our annual report. We could be an emerging growth company for up to five years following the completion of our initial public offering, although circumstances could cause us to lose that status earlier, including if we are deemed to be a “large accelerated filer,” which occurs when the market value of our common stock that is held by non-affiliates exceeds $700 million as of the prior June 30, or if we have total annual gross revenue of $1.235 billion or more during any fiscal year before that time, in which cases we would no longer be an emerging growth company as of the following December 31, or if we issue more than $1.0 billion in non-convertible debt during any three-year period before that time, in which case we would no longer be an emerging growth company immediately. We cannot predict if investors will find our common stock less attractive because we may rely on these exemptions. If some investors find our common stock less attractive as a result, there may be a less active trading market for our common stock and our share price may be more volatile.

Previous wording

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, legislation informally titled the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act; the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act; and the Inflation Reduction Act enacted many significant changes to the U.S. tax laws. Future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to such legislation may affect us, and certain aspects of such legislation could be repealed or modified in future legislation. The Trump administration and the U.S. Congress could also enact other tax law changes that could have an adverse effect on our operations, cash flows and results from operations and contribute to overall market volatility. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax legislation. Changes in corporate tax rates, the realization of net deferred tax assets relating to our operations, the taxation of foreign earnings, and the deductibility of expenses could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense.

Current wording

New income, sales, use or other tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be enacted at any time, which could adversely affect our business operations and financial performance. Further, existing tax laws, statutes, rules, regulations or ordinances could be interpreted, changed, modified or applied adversely to us. For example, the U.S. government recently enacted the OBBBA, that (along with other recent U.S. federal tax reform) has resulted in significant changes to the taxation of business entities including, among other changes, changes to the taxation of income derived from international operations, changes in the deduction and amortization of research and development expenditures, and limitations on the deductibility of business interest. Future guidance from the Internal Revenue Service and other tax authorities with respect to any legislation may affect us, and certain aspects of such legislation could be repealed or modified in future legislation. The Trump administration and the U.S. Congress could also enact other tax law changes that could have an adverse effect on our operations, cash flows and results from operations and contribute to overall market volatility. In addition, it is uncertain if and to what extent various states will conform to federal tax legislation. Changes in corporate tax rates, the realization of net deferred tax assets relating to our operations, the taxation of foreign earnings, and the deductibility of expenses could have a material impact on the value of our deferred tax assets, could result in significant one-time charges, and could increase our future U.S. tax expense.

Previous wording

Our current controls and any new controls that we develop may become inadequate because of changes in conditions in our business. Further, weaknesses in our disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting may be discovered in the future. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement could harm our results of operations or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations and may result in a restatement of our consolidated financial statements for prior periods. Any failure to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could also adversely affect the results of periodic management evaluations and annual independent registered public accounting firm attestation reports regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting that we will eventually be required to include in our periodic reports that will be filed with the SEC. Ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial and other information, which would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our common stock. In addition, if we are unable to continue to meet these requirements, we may not be able to remain listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market.

Current wording

Our current controls and any new controls that we develop may become inadequate because of changes in conditions in our business. Further, weaknesses in our disclosure controls and internal control over financial reporting may be discovered in the future. Any failure to develop or maintain effective controls or any difficulties encountered in their implementation or improvement could harm our results of operations or cause us to fail to meet our reporting obligations and may result in a restatement of our consolidated financial statements for prior periods. Any failure to implement and maintain effective internal control over financial reporting could also adversely affect the results of periodic management evaluations and annual independent registered public accounting firm attestation reports regarding the effectiveness of our internal control over financial reporting that we will be required to include in our periodic reports that will be filed with the SEC. As of June 30, 2025, the market value of our common stock held by non-affiliates exceeded $700.0 million. As a result, effective December 31, 2025, we will be a large accelerated filer and thus will cease to be an emerging growth company. Additionally, we will no longer qualify as a smaller reporting company beginning with our first Quarterly Report on Form 10-Q for the quarterly period ending March 31, 2026. As a result of this transition, we will be required to include an attestation report on internal control over financial reporting issued by our independent registered public accounting firm with our Annual Reports on Form 10-K starting with the Annual Report on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ending December 31, 2025. Ineffective disclosure controls and procedures and internal control over financial reporting could also cause investors to lose confidence in our reported financial and other information, which would likely have a negative effect on the trading price of our common stock. In addition, if we are unable to continue to meet these requirements, we may not be able to remain listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market.

Previous wording

As a public company listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market, we incur significant expenses for director and officer insurance, legal services, accounting services and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC, and The Nasdaq Capital Market have imposed various requirements on public companies. In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, was enacted. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that required the SEC to adopt rules and regulations in these areas such as “say on pay” and proxy access. Recent legislation permits smaller “emerging growth companies” to implement many of these requirements over a longer period and up to five years from the pricing of our initial public offering. We intend to continue to take advantage of this legislation but cannot guarantee that we will not be required to implement these requirements sooner than budgeted or planned and thereby incur unexpected expenses. Stockholder activism, the current political environment and the current high level of government intervention and regulatory reform may lead to substantial new regulations and disclosure obligations, which may lead to additional compliance costs and impact the manner in which we operate our business in ways we cannot currently anticipate. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costlier. For example, these rules and regulations make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we are required to incur substantial costs to maintain our current levels of such coverage.

Current wording

As a public company listed on The Nasdaq Capital Market, we incur significant expenses for director and officer insurance, legal services, accounting services and other expenses that we did not incur as a private company. In addition, the Sarbanes-Oxley Act, as well as rules subsequently implemented by the SEC, and The Nasdaq Capital Market have imposed various requirements on public companies. In July 2010, the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform and Consumer Protection Act, or the Dodd-Frank Act, was enacted. There are significant corporate governance and executive compensation related provisions in the Dodd-Frank Act that required the SEC to adopt rules and regulations in these areas such as “say on pay” and proxy access. Furthermore, stockholder activism, the current political environment and the current high level of government intervention and regulatory reform may lead to substantial new regulations and disclosure obligations, which may lead to additional compliance costs and impact the manner in which we operate our business in ways we cannot currently anticipate. Our management and other personnel will need to devote a substantial amount of time to these compliance initiatives. Moreover, these rules and regulations increase our legal and financial compliance costs and make some activities more time-consuming and costlier. For example, these rules and regulations make it more difficult and more expensive for us to obtain director and officer liability insurance and we are required to incur substantial costs to maintain our current levels of such coverage.