INOVIO PHARMACEUTICALS, INC.

Previous wording

Our historical financial statements have been prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. As of September 30, 2025, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.8 billion and had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $50.8 million These conditions raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date the financial statements are issued. Based on our current plans and forecasted expenses, we expect that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments as of the filing date, November 10, 2025, will enable us to fund our planned operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the second quarter of 2026. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our capital resources sooner than expected. Until we can generate sufficient revenue, if ever, to fund our operations, we will need to finance future cash needs through strategic alliance and licensing arrangements, grant agreements and/or future public or private debt or equity financings including At-the-Market Equity Offering Sales Agreements.

Current wording

Our historical financial statements have been prepared under the assumption that we will continue as a going concern. As of March 31, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $1.8 billion and had cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments of $37.7 million. These conditions raise substantial doubt about our ability to continue as a going concern within one year after the date the financial statements are issued. Based on our current plans and forecasted expenses, we expect that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments as of the filing date, May 13, 2026, together with the net proceeds of $16.0 million from the April 2026 Offering, which closed on April 6, 2026, will enable us to fund our planned operating expenses and capital expenditure requirements into the first quarter of 2027. We have based this estimate on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could exhaust our capital resources sooner than expected. Until we can generate sufficient revenue, if ever, to fund our operations, we will need to finance future cash needs through strategic alliance and licensing arrangements, grant agreements and/or future public or private debt or equity financings including At-the-Market Equity Offering Sales Agreements.

Previous wording

If we are unable to obtain FDA approval of our proprietary devices and DNA medicine candidates, we will not be able to commercialize them in the United States. In particular, because our product candidates are drug-device combination products comprising an electroporation device for delivery of a biologic, additional time may be required to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates because of the complexity involved with developing and manufacturing a drug-device combination product. In addition, if the FDA and similar regulatory authorities do not provide marketing authorization for our CELLECTRA delivery devices, then we will not be able to bring to market our DNA medicines that rely on delivery by such a device.

Current wording

Our product candidates are drug-device combination products comprising an electroporation device for delivery of a biologic, and additional time may be required to obtain regulatory approval for our product candidates because of the complexity involved with developing and manufacturing a drug-device combination product. If the FDA and comparable regulatory authorities in foreign jurisdictions do not provide marketing authorization for our CELLECTRA delivery devices, then we will not be able to bring to market our DNA medicines that rely on delivery by such devices.

Previous wording

We need FDA approval prior to marketing our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates as combination products in the United States. If we fail to obtain FDA approval to market our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates as combination products, we will be unable to sell our products in the United States, which will significantly impair our ability to generate any revenues.

Current wording

Our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates are regulated as combination products. We will need to receive marketing authorization for both the device and biologic constituent parts of our products. In the United States, this comes in the form of a single BLA with input from the FDA’s device regulators, but in other jurisdictions there may be separate marketing authorizations for the device and biologic constituent parts, both of which will be necessary in order to sell our products. If we do not obtain marketing authorization for both the device and biologic constituent parts of our products, we will be unable to sell our products, which will significantly impair our ability to generate any revenues.

Previous wording

This regulatory review and approval process, which includes evaluation of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our combination products as well as the evaluation of our device design, manufacturing processes and our third-party contract manufacturers' facilities, is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. To receive approval, we must, among other things, demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials that our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates are both safe and effective for each indication for which approval is sought. In determining what is needed to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a combination product, the FDA takes into account the questions and considerations, reflected in the statutory and regulatory provisions associated with each constituent part in the FDA’s review of the combination product as a whole and its constituent parts. This includes how the constituent parts may interact and interrelate and is a complex process. To the extent that our DNA medicine candidates are manufactured at multiple sites or using different processes, we will also need to demonstrate comparability across the manufacturing batches in order to obtain regulatory approval. Satisfaction of the approval requirements typically takes several years and the time needed to satisfy them may vary substantially, based on the type, complexity and novelty of the product. We do not know if or when we might receive regulatory approvals for our proprietary device and any of our DNA medicine candidates currently under development. Moreover, any approvals that we obtain may not cover all of the clinical indications for which we are seeking approval, or could contain significant limitations in the form of narrow indications, warnings, precautions or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use. In such event, our ability to generate revenues from such products would be greatly reduced and our business would be harmed.

Current wording

The regulatory review and approval process, which includes evaluation of preclinical studies and clinical trials of our combination products as well as the evaluation of our device design, manufacturing processes and our third-party contract manufacturers' facilities, is lengthy, expensive and uncertain. To receive approval, we must, among other things, demonstrate with substantial evidence from well-controlled clinical trials that our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates are both safe and effective for each indication for which approval is sought. In determining what is needed to demonstrate the safety and effectiveness of a combination product, the FDA takes into account the questions and considerations, reflected in the statutory and regulatory provisions associated with each constituent part in the FDA’s review of the combination product as a whole and its constituent parts. This includes how the constituent parts may interact and interrelate and is a complex process. To the extent that our DNA medicine candidates are manufactured at multiple sites or using different processes, we will also need to demonstrate comparability across the manufacturing batches in order to obtain regulatory approval. Satisfaction of the approval requirements typically takes several years and the time needed to satisfy them may vary substantially, based on the type, complexity and novelty of the product. We do not know if or when we might receive regulatory approvals for our proprietary device and any of our DNA medicine candidates currently under development. Moreover, any approvals that we obtain may not cover all of the clinical indications for which we are seeking approval, or could contain significant limitations in the form of narrow indications, warnings, precautions or contra-indications with respect to conditions of use. In such event, our ability to generate revenues from such products would be greatly reduced and our business would be harmed.

Previous wording

We requested rolling submission of our BLA for INO-3107 in July 2025 and reported in November 2025 that we had completed the BLA submission, with the goal of receiving file acceptance by the FDA by the end of 2025. The FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process and may issue a refusal to file letter rather than accept the BLA for review. Even if it accepts the BLA for filing, the FDA may form the opinion after review of our data that our application is insufficient to allow approval of INO-3107 and instead issue a complete response letter. If the FDA does not accept for filing or approve our application, it may require that we conduct additional clinical, preclinical or manufacturing validation studies and submit that data before it will reconsider our application. Depending on the extent of these or any other studies, approval of any applications that we submit may be delayed by several years, or may require us to expend more resources than we have available. It is also possible that additional studies, if performed and completed, may not be successful or considered sufficient by the FDA for approval or even to make our applications approvable. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to abandon one or more of our applications for approval, which might significantly harm our business and prospects.

Current wording

The FDA has substantial discretion in the approval process and may form the opinion after review of our data that our BLA currently under review is insufficient to allow approval of INO-3107 and instead issue a complete response letter. If the FDA does not approve our BLA, it may require that we conduct additional clinical, preclinical or manufacturing validation studies and submit that data before it will reconsider our application. Depending on the extent of these or any other studies, approval of any applications that we submit may be delayed by several years, or may require us to expend more resources than we have available. It is also possible that additional studies, if performed and completed, may not be successful or considered sufficient by the FDA for approval or even to make our applications approvable. If any of these outcomes occur, we may be forced to abandon one or more of our applications for approval, which might significantly harm our business and prospects.

Previous wording

It is possible that none of our product candidates or any product we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain the appropriate regulatory approvals necessary for us or our collaborators to commence product sales. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approvals would prevent us from commercializing our products, generating revenues and achieving and sustaining profitability.

Current wording

It is possible that none of our product candidates or any product we may seek to develop in the future will ever obtain the appropriate regulatory approvals necessary for us or our collaborators to commence product sales. While our CELLECTRA 5PSP is CE-marked in the European Union, INO-3107 requires marketing authorization approval in order that we may commercialize the combination product. Any delay in obtaining, or an inability to obtain, applicable regulatory approvals would prevent us from commercializing our products, generating revenues and achieving and sustaining profitability.

Previous wording

We plan to pursue accelerated approval for INO-3107 for the treatment of RRP and may in the future decide to pursue accelerated approval for one or more of our other product candidates. Under the FDA’s accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a drug or biologic for a serious or life-threatening disease or condition that provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies based upon a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. For drugs or biologics granted accelerated approval, post-marketing confirmatory trials are required to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence, and the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated, and/or fully enrolled prior to approval.

Current wording

We are pursuing accelerated approval for INO-3107 for the treatment of RRP and may in the future decide to pursue accelerated approval for one or more of our other product candidates. Under the FDA’s accelerated approval program, the FDA may approve a drug or biologic for a serious or life-threatening disease or condition that provides a meaningful advantage over available therapies based upon a surrogate endpoint that is reasonably likely to predict clinical benefit, or on a clinical endpoint that can be measured earlier than irreversible morbidity or mortality that is reasonably likely to predict an effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. For drugs or biologics granted accelerated approval, post-marketing confirmatory trials are required to verify and describe the anticipated effect on irreversible morbidity or mortality or other clinical benefit. These confirmatory trials must be completed with due diligence, and the FDA may require that the trial be designed, initiated, and/or fully enrolled prior to approval.

Previous wording

Our pursuit of accelerated approval for INO-3107 and any future product candidates would be on the basis that there is no available therapy for a particular disease or condition or that our product candidate provides a benefit over available therapy. If standard of care were to evolve or if any of our competitors were to receive full approval on the basis of a confirmatory trial for a drug or biologic for a disease or condition for which we are seeking accelerated approval before we receive accelerated approval, the disease or condition would no longer qualify as one for which there is no available therapy, and accelerated approval of our product candidate would not occur without a showing of benefit over available therapy. For example, in light of the FDA’s approval of PAPZIMEOS (zopapogene imadenovec-drba) for the treatment of RRP in adults, we anticipate that the FDA will not accept the filing of our BLA for INO-3107 under the accelerated approval pathway unless we demonstrate at a minimum how INO-3107 provides a clinically meaningful benefit over existing therapies, including PAPZIMEOS. The treatment landscape can change quickly as the FDA converts accelerated approvals to full approvals on the basis of successful confirmatory trials.

Current wording

Our pursuit of accelerated approval for INO-3107 and any future product candidates would be on the basis that there is no available therapy for a particular disease or condition or that our product candidate provides a benefit over available therapy. If standard of care were to evolve or if any of our competitors were to receive full approval on the basis of a confirmatory trial for a drug or biologic for a disease or condition for which we are seeking accelerated approval before we receive accelerated approval, the disease or condition would no longer qualify as one for which there is no available therapy, and accelerated approval of our product candidate would not occur without a showing of benefit over available therapy. For example, in light of the FDA’s approval of PAPZIMEOS (zopapogene imadenovec-drba) for the treatment of RRP in adults, we anticipate that the FDA will not approve our BLA for INO-3107 under the accelerated approval pathway unless we demonstrate that INO-3107 provides a clinically meaningful benefit over existing therapies, including PAPZIMEOS. The treatment landscape can change quickly as the FDA converts accelerated approvals to full approvals on the basis of successful confirmatory trials.

Previous wording

We have received feedback from the FDA that data from our completed Phase 1/2 clinical trial of INO-3107 can be used to support the submission of our planned BLA for review under the accelerated approval program; however, whether this trial will be sufficient to receive FDA approval under the accelerated approval pathway will only be determined by the FDA upon review of the submitted BLA. We have requested a priority review from the FDA of our BLA for INO-3107. If the FDA determines that the accelerated approval pathway is not available to INO-3107, it would refuse to file our BLA and require that we seek full approval instead, which would result in material delay and cost in the development program and would materially impact our business and financial condition.

Current wording

Whether our completed Phase 1/2 clinical trial of INO-3107 will be sufficient to support FDA approval under the accelerated approval pathway will only be determined by the FDA upon review of the submitted BLA. If the FDA determines that the accelerated approval pathway is not available to INO-3107, it would require that we seek full approval instead, and the clinical data from our Phase 1/2 trial may be insufficient to support full approval such that we could receive a complete response letter and be required to conduct a comparative trial in order to resubmit our BLA, which would result in material delay and cost in the development program and would materially impact our business and financial condition.

Previous wording

•global unrest, including geopolitical risks emanating from countries such as Russia and China, global pathogen outbreaks or pandemics, terrorist activities, the conflict between Israel and Hamas, bank failures and other economic and other external factors beyond our control.

Current wording

•global unrest, including geopolitical conflicts, global pathogen outbreaks or pandemics, terrorist activities, bank failures and other economic and other external factors beyond our control.

Previous wording

With respect to clinical trials of product candidates for rare diseases, such as our planned confirmatory trial of INO-3107 for the treatment of RRP, we may encounter difficulties in recruiting a sufficient number of patients to enroll in the trial due to the small number of patients with the disease. Because RRP is caused by specific HPV types, 6 and 11, and there is currently no standard protocol for diagnostic/screening of RRP patients unless there are symptoms of dysphonia, respiratory distress or other symptoms related to the presence of papillomas, it may be difficult to identify and diagnose patients for whom INO-3107 may be a potential treatment.

Current wording

With respect to clinical trials of product candidates for rare diseases, such as our planned confirmatory trial of INO-3107 for the treatment of RRP, we may encounter difficulties in recruiting a sufficient number of patients to enroll in the trial due to the small number of patients with the disease and the recent availability of an approved immunotherapy. Because RRP is caused by specific HPV types, 6 and 11, and there is currently no standard protocol for diagnostic/screening of RRP patients unless there are symptoms of dysphonia, respiratory distress or other symptoms related to the presence of papillomas, it may be difficult to identify and diagnose patients for whom INO-3107 may be a potential treatment.

Previous wording

No DNA medicines have been granted an EUA or have been approved to date by the FDA. Adverse events in clinical trials of our investigational medicines or in clinical trials of others developing similar products and the resulting publicity, as well as any other adverse events in the field of DNA medicine, or other products that are perceived to be similar to DNA medicines, such as those related to other nucleic acid based vaccines such as mRNA vaccines, gene therapy or gene editing, could result in a decrease in the perceived benefit of one or more of our programs, increased regulatory scrutiny, decreased confidence by patients and clinical trial collaborators in our investigational medicines, and less demand for any product that we may develop. Our pipeline of DNA medicine candidates could result in a greater quantity of reportable adverse events, including suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions, other reportable negative clinical outcomes, manufacturing reportable events or material clinical events that could lead to clinical delay or hold by the FDA or applicable regulatory authority or other clinical delays, any of which could negatively impact the perception of one or more of our programs, as well as our business as a whole. In addition, responses by U.S., state, or foreign governments to negative public perception may result in new legislation or regulations that could limit our ability to develop any investigational medicines or commercialize any approved products, obtain or maintain regulatory approval, or otherwise achieve profitability. More restrictive statutory regimes, government regulations, or negative public opinion would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects and may delay or impair the development of our investigational medicines and commercialization of any approved products or demand for any products we may develop.

Current wording

No DNA medicines have been approved to date by the FDA. Adverse events in clinical trials of our investigational medicines or in clinical trials of others developing similar products and the resulting publicity, as well as any other adverse events in the field of DNA medicine, or other products that are perceived to be similar to DNA medicines, such as those related to other nucleic acid based vaccines such as mRNA vaccines, gene therapy or gene editing, could result in a decrease in the perceived benefit of one or more of our programs, increased regulatory scrutiny, decreased confidence by patients and clinical trial collaborators in our investigational medicines, and less demand for any product that we may develop. Our pipeline of DNA medicine candidates could result in a greater quantity of reportable adverse events, including suspected unexpected serious adverse reactions, other reportable negative clinical outcomes, manufacturing reportable events or material clinical events that could lead to clinical delay or hold by the FDA or applicable regulatory authority or other clinical delays, any of which could negatively impact the perception of one or more of our programs, as well as our business as a whole. In addition, responses by U.S., state, or foreign governments to negative public perception may result in new legislation or regulations that could limit our ability to develop any investigational medicines or commercialize any approved products, obtain or maintain regulatory approval, or otherwise achieve profitability. More restrictive statutory regimes, government regulations, or negative public opinion would have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations, and prospects and may delay or impair the development of our investigational medicines and commercialization of any approved products or demand for any products we may develop.

Previous wording

There are no pharmacologic therapies approved to treat the underlying causes of many diseases that we currently attempt to address or may address in the future. There has been limited clinical trial experience for the development of pharmaceuticals to treat these rare diseases in general, and we are not aware of a registrational trial that led to approval of a drug to treat these diseases. There have been some historical trials with other agents which may have utilized clinical endpoints that are less applicable to our efforts that address the underlying defect. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials of investigational medicines for the treatment of these disorders and other disorders may take longer, be more costly, or be less effective as part of the novelty of development in these diseases. For example, our product candidate INO-3107 is being developed for RRP, a rare condition for which there are no approved non-surgical treatments.

Current wording

There are no pharmacologic therapies approved to treat the underlying causes of many diseases that we currently attempt to address or may address in the future. There has been limited clinical trial experience for the development of pharmaceuticals to treat these rare diseases in general, and we are not aware of a registrational trial that led to approval of a drug to treat these diseases. There have been some historical trials with other agents which may have utilized clinical endpoints that are less applicable to our efforts that address the underlying defect. As a result, the design and conduct of clinical trials of investigational medicines for the treatment of these disorders and other disorders may take longer, be more costly, or be less effective as part of the novelty of development in these diseases.

Previous wording

We currently have only a small marketing organization and no sales organization. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, if approved, we may not be able to generate product revenues.

Current wording

We currently have only a small marketing and sales organization. If we are unable to establish marketing and sales capabilities or enter into agreements with third parties to market and sell our products, if approved, we may not be able to generate product revenues.

Previous wording

We currently have only a small commercial organization to support pre-commercial activities for our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates, if approved, and we do not currently have a sales organization. In order to successfully commercialize INO-3107 or any other products that may receive regulatory approval, we must build our marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. We contemplate establishing our own sales force or seeking third-party partners to sell our products. The establishment and development of a sales force, either on our own or in conjunction with third parties, will be expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch, and we may not be able to successfully develop or acquire this capability. We will also have to compete with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. To the extent we rely on third parties to commercialize our approved products, if any, we will receive lower revenues than if we commercialized these products ourselves. In the event we are unable to successfully develop our own marketing and sales force or collaborate with a third-party marketing and sales organization, we would not be able to commercialize our DNA medicine candidates which would negatively impact our ability to generate product revenues.

Current wording

We currently have only a small commercial organization to support pre-commercial activities for our proprietary device and DNA medicine candidates, if approved. In order to successfully commercialize INO-3107 or any other products that may receive regulatory approval, we must build our marketing, sales, distribution, managerial and other non-technical capabilities or make arrangements with third parties to perform these services. We contemplate establishing our own sales force or seeking third-party partners to sell our products. The establishment and development of a sales force, either on our own or in conjunction with third parties, will be expensive and time-consuming and could delay any product launch, and we may not be able to successfully develop or acquire this capability. We will also have to compete with other pharmaceutical and biotechnology companies to recruit, hire, train and retain marketing and sales personnel. To the extent we rely on third parties to commercialize our approved products, if any, we will receive lower revenues than if we commercialized these products ourselves. In the event we are unable to successfully develop our own marketing and sales force or collaborate with a third- party marketing and sales organization, we would not be able to commercialize our DNA medicine candidates which would negatively impact our ability to generate product revenues.

Previous wording

A significant trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular products and services. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the effectiveness of and prices charged for medical products and services. Moreover, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governmental entities have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and coverage and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. We may not be able to obtain third-party payor coverage or reimbursement for our products in whole or in part. Further, coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Therefore, even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Current wording

A significant trend in the U.S. healthcare industry and elsewhere is cost containment. Third-party payors have attempted to control costs by limiting coverage and the amount of reimbursement for particular products and services. Third-party payors are increasingly challenging the effectiveness of and prices charged for medical products and services. Moreover, the U.S. government, state legislatures and foreign governmental entities have shown significant interest in implementing cost containment programs to limit the growth of government-paid healthcare costs, including price controls, restrictions on reimbursement and coverage and requirements for substitution of generic products for branded prescription drugs. For example, the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, or HHS, imposes rebates on many Medicare Part B and Medicare Part D products to penalize price increases that outpace inflation on an annual basis. HHS has also been empowered to negotiate the price of certain single-source biologics that have been on the market for at least eleven (11) years covered under Medicare as part of the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Each year up to twenty (20) products will be selected by HHS for the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program. Products subject to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program are expected to experience a significant reduction in reimbursement from the Medicare program on a per unit basis. We may not be able to obtain third-party payor coverage or reimbursement for our products in whole or in part. Further, coverage policies and third-party payor reimbursement rates may change at any time. Therefore, even if favorable coverage and reimbursement status is attained for one or more products, less favorable coverage policies and reimbursement rates may be implemented in the future.

Previous wording

We face intense and increasing competition and steps taken by our competitors such as the introduction of a new, disruptive technology may impede our ability to develop and commercialize our DNA medicines.

Current wording

We face intense and increasing competition and steps taken by our competitors, such as the full approval of PAPZIMEOS for the treatment of RRP or the introduction of other new, disruptive technology, may impede our ability to develop and commercialize our DNA medicines.

Previous wording

Merck and GlaxoSmithKline have commercialized preventive vaccines against HPV to protect against cervical cancer. Some companies are seeking to treat early HPV infections or low-grade cervical dysplasia. Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure, commonly known as LEEP, is a surgical procedure and is the current standard of care in the United States and other high income countries for treating high-grade cervical dysplasia. In RRP caused by HPV subtypes 6 and 11, Precigen received approval for PAPZIMEOS (zopapogene imadenovec-drba). As a result, we are at a competitive disadvantage in this indication. Advaxis, Genexine, and Gilead Sciences have therapeutic cervical cancer product candidates under development. Many companies are pursuing different approaches to pre-cancers and cancers we are targeting.

Current wording

Merck and GlaxoSmithKline have commercialized preventive vaccines against HPV to protect against cervical cancer. Some companies are seeking to treat early HPV infections or low-grade cervical dysplasia. Loop Electrosurgical Excision Procedure, commonly known as LEEP, is a surgical procedure and is the current standard of care in the United States and other high income countries for treating high-grade cervical dysplasia. In RRP caused by HPV subtypes 6 and 11, Precigen received full approval for PAPZIMEOS (zopapogene imadenovec-drba). As a result, we are at a competitive disadvantage in this indication. Advaxis, Genexine, and Gilead Sciences have therapeutic cervical cancer product candidates under development. Many companies are pursuing different approaches to pre-cancers and cancers we are targeting.

Previous wording

We may have actions brought against us by stockholders relating to past transactions, changes in our stock price or other matters, and there can be no guarantee that we will not become subject to similar claims in the future.

Current wording

We may have actions brought against us by stockholders relating to past transactions, changes in our stock price or other matters, and there can be no guarantee that we will not become subject to similar claims in the future. For example, a purported shareholder class action complaint has been filed against us, naming us and our executive officers as defendants, and alleging that we made materially false and misleading statements regarding the submission to the FDA and the FDA’s review timeline for the Company’s Biologics License Application for INO-3107 in violation of certain federal securities laws.

Previous wording

We have entered into collaborations with Chinese companies and may rely on clinical materials manufactured in China for our development efforts. Uncertainties regarding the interpretation and enforcement of Chinese laws, rules and regulations, a trade war, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in China could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

We have entered into collaborations with Chinese companies and may rely on clinical materials and device components manufactured in China for our development efforts. Uncertainties regarding the interpretation and enforcement of Chinese laws, rules and regulations, a trade war, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in China could materially adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

We are party to a license and collaboration agreement with a China-based company, ApolloBio, pursuant to which ApolloBio has the exclusive right to develop and commercialize VGX-3100 in China, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. We are also party to a collaboration and license agreement with Advaccine Biopharmaceuticals Suzhou Co., Ltd. (“Advaccine”) which gives Advaccine the exclusive right to develop, manufacture and commercialize the Company’s vaccine candidate INO-4800 within the territories of China, Taiwan, Hong Kong and Macau (referred to collectively as “Greater China”) and 33 additional countries in Asia. The Chinese legal system is a civil law system based on written statutes. Unlike the common law system, prior court decisions may be cited for reference but have limited precedential value. In addition, the Chinese legal system is based in part on government policies and internal rules, some of which are not published on a timely basis or at all, and which may have a retroactive effect. As a result, we may not be aware of our violation of these policies and rules until after the occurrence of the violation. Any administrative and court proceedings in China may be protracted, resulting in substantial costs and diversion of resources and management attention. Because Chinese administrative and court authorities have significant discretion in interpreting and implementing statutory and contractual terms, it may be more difficult to evaluate the outcome of administrative and court proceedings and the level of legal protection we enjoy than in more developed legal systems.

Current wording

We are party to a license and collaboration agreement with a China-based company, ApolloBio, pursuant to which ApolloBio has the exclusive right to develop and commercialize VGX-3100 in China, Hong Kong, Macao and Taiwan. The Chinese legal system is a civil law system based on written statutes. Unlike the common law system, prior court decisions may be cited for reference but have limited precedential value. In addition, the Chinese legal system is based in part on government policies and internal rules, some of which are not published on a timely basis or at all, and which may have a retroactive effect. As a result, we may not be aware of our violation of these policies and rules until after the occurrence of the violation. Any administrative and court proceedings in China may be protracted, resulting in substantial costs and diversion of resources and management attention. Because Chinese administrative and court authorities have significant discretion in interpreting and implementing statutory and contractual terms, it may be more difficult to evaluate the outcome of administrative and court proceedings and the level of legal protection we enjoy than in more developed legal systems.

Previous wording

Furthermore, we are exposed to the possibility of disruption of our research and development activities in the event of changes in the policies of the United States or Chinese governments, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in China. In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry in China is strictly regulated by the Chinese government. Changes to Chinese regulations or government policies affecting biopharmaceutical companies are unpredictable and may have a material adverse effect on ApolloBio or Advaccine, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Evolving changes in China’s public health, economic, political, and social conditions and the uncertainty around China’s relationship with other governments, including the threat of a trade war between the United States and China, could lead to supply chain disruptions or increased costs for clinical materials manufactured in China that are necessary for our development efforts. Certain Chinese biotechnology companies and contract development and manufacturing organizations may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or proposed legislation by the U.S. government, which could potentially impact our ability to secure the materials we need for our product candidates. For example, the recently proposed BIOSECURE Act that was passed by the U.S. House of Representatives in September 2024, as well as a substantially similar bill in the U.S. Senate, target U.S. government contracts, grants, and loans for entities that use equipment and services from certain named Chinese biotech companies, and authorize the U.S. government to name additional Chinese biotechnology companies of concern. If these bills become law, or similar laws are passed, they would have the potential to severely restrict the ability of companies to work with certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. We may also be exposed to fluctuations in the value of the local currency in China. These disruptions, failures or uncertainties may have adverse impacts on the development of our product candidates, our ability to commercialize our DNA medicine candidates, if approved, our business operations, our ability to enforce the contracts we have entered into and could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Current wording

Furthermore, we are exposed to the possibility of disruption of our research and development activities in the event of changes in the policies of the United States or Chinese governments, political unrest or unstable economic conditions in China. In addition, the biopharmaceutical industry in China is strictly regulated by the Chinese government. Changes to Chinese regulations or government policies affecting biopharmaceutical companies are unpredictable and may have a material adverse effect on ApolloBio, which could have an adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects. Evolving changes in China’s public health, economic, political, and social conditions and the uncertainty around China’s relationship with other governments, including the threat of a trade war between the United States and China, could lead to supply chain disruptions or increased costs for clinical materials manufactured in China that are necessary for our development efforts. Certain Chinese biotechnology companies and contract development and manufacturing organizations may become subject to trade restrictions, sanctions, other regulatory requirements, or legislation enacted by the U.S. government, which could potentially impact our ability to secure the materials we need for our product candidates. For example, the BIOSECURE Act was signed into law on December 18, 2025, and targets U.S. government contracts, grants, and loans for entities that use equipment and services from certain named Chinese biotech companies, and authorizes the U.S. government to name additional Chinese biotechnology companies of concern. This law, and any similar laws that may be enacted in the future, has the potential to severely restrict the ability of companies to work with certain Chinese biotechnology companies of concern without losing the ability to contract with, or otherwise receive funding from, the U.S. government. We may also be exposed to fluctuations in the value of the local currency in China. These disruptions, failures or uncertainties may have adverse impacts on the development of our product candidates, our ability to commercialize our DNA medicine candidates, if approved, our business operations, our ability to enforce the contracts we have entered into and could materially and adversely affect our business, financial condition and results of operations.

Previous wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies 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. 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. In 2025, widespread reductions in force among federal agencies have occurred and may adversely impact the ability of FDA to timely review applications, including our planned BLA. The prolonged government shutdown and reduction of personnel and funding levels could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Current wording

Disruptions at the FDA and other agencies 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. 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. In 2025, widespread reductions in force among federal agencies occurred and may adversely impact the ability of FDA to timely review applications, including our planned BLA. The prolonged government shutdown and reduction of personnel and funding levels could significantly impact the ability of the FDA to timely review and process our regulatory submissions, which could have a material adverse effect on our business.

Previous wording

We rely to a large extent upon sophisticated information technology systems to operate our businesses, some of which are managed, hosted provided and/or used for third-parties or their vendors. We collect, store and transmit large amounts of confidential, proprietary or otherwise sensitive information (including personal information and pseudonymized information), and we deploy and operate an array of technical and procedural controls designed to maintain the confidentiality, availability and integrity of such information as appropriate. A significant breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction, interruption, or unavailability of critical information technology systems or infrastructure, by our workforce, others with authorized access to our systems or unauthorized persons could negatively impact operations. Hardware, software, or applications we develop or obtain from third parties may contain defects in design or manufacture or other supply chain problems that could unexpectedly compromise our information and network security.

Current wording

We rely to a large extent upon information technology systems to operate our businesses, some of which are managed, hosted provided and/or used for third-parties or their vendors. We collect, store and transmit large amounts of confidential, proprietary or otherwise sensitive information (including personal information and pseudonymized information), and we deploy and operate an array of technical and procedural controls designed to maintain the confidentiality, availability and integrity of such information as appropriate. A significant breakdown, invasion, corruption, destruction, interruption, unavailability or other compromise of critical information technology systems or infrastructure, by our workforce, others with authorized access to our systems or unauthorized persons could negatively impact operations. Hardware, software, or applications we develop or obtain from third parties may contain defects in design or manufacture or other supply chain problems that could unexpectedly compromise our information and network security.

Previous wording

The ever-increasing use and evolution of technology, including cloud-based computing, creates opportunities for the compromise of information stored in our or our third-party providers' systems, portable media or storage devices. Cyber-attacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud and other similar activities threaten our information and information technology systems and those of third parties with whom we work. Such threats are prevalent and continue to rise, are increasingly difficult to detect and come from a variety of sources such as traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through error or malfeasance), sophisticated national states and nation-state support actors (for example, in conjunction with military conflicts). During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties with whom we work may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks. We and they are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to business interruption, loss of information, theft of information or reputational damage from industrial espionage attacks, malware or other cyber-attacks (including ransomware), social-engineering attacks (including through deep fakes and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing attacks, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, telecommunications failures, natural disasters, attacks enhanced or facilitated by artificial intelligence, or AI, and other similar threats, any of which may compromise our system infrastructure or lead to data compromise. In particular, severe ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data, reputational harm, diversion of funds and the potential loss of income. Extortion payments may alleviate some of the negative impact of a ransomware attack but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments. Remote work has also become more common and increased risks to our information technology systems and data. Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities resent in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during diligence of such acquired or integrated entities and it may be difficult to integrate such entities into our information technology environment and security programs.

Current wording

The ever-increasing use and evolution of technology, including cloud-based computing, creates opportunities for the compromise of information processed by us or our third-party providers. Cyber-attacks, malicious internet-based activity, online and offline fraud and other similar activities threaten our information and information technology systems and those of third parties with whom we work. Such threats are prevalent and continue to rise, are increasingly difficult to detect and come from a variety of sources such as traditional computer “hackers,” threat actors, “hacktivists,” organized criminal threat actors, personnel (such as through error or malfeasance), sophisticated national states and nation-state support actors (for example, in conjunction with military conflicts). During times of war and other major conflicts, we and the third parties with whom we work may be vulnerable to a heightened risk of these attacks. We and they are subject to a variety of evolving threats, including but not limited to business interruption, loss of information, theft of information or reputational damage from industrial espionage attacks, malware or other cyber-attacks (including ransomware), social-engineering attacks (including through deep fakes which may be increasingly more difficult to identify as fake and phishing attacks), malicious code (such as viruses and worms), denial-of-service attacks, credential stuffing attacks, credential harvesting, personnel misconduct or error, supply-chain attacks, software bugs, server malfunctions, software or hardware failures, telecommunications failures, natural disasters, attacks enhanced or facilitated by artificial intelligence, or AI, and other similar threats, any of which may compromise our system infrastructure or lead to data compromise. In particular, severe ransomware attacks are becoming increasingly prevalent and can lead to significant interruptions in our operations, loss of data, reputational harm, diversion of funds and the potential loss of income. Extortion payments may alleviate some of the negative impact of a ransomware attack but we may be unwilling or unable to make such payments. Remote work poses increased risks to our information technology systems and data. Future or past business transactions (such as acquisitions or integrations) could expose us to additional cybersecurity risks and vulnerabilities as our systems could be negatively affected by vulnerabilities resent in acquired or integrated entities’ systems and technologies. Furthermore, we may discover security issues that were not found during diligence of such acquired or integrated entities and it may be difficult to integrate such entities into our information technology environment and security programs.

Previous wording

We rely on third parties to operate critical business systems to process sensitive information in a variety of contexts, including without limitation, cloud-based infrastructure, personnel email, data hosting, and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited and they may not have adequate information security measures in place. If they were to experience a security incident or other interruption, we could also experience adverse consequences. While we may be entitled to damages if those third parties fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any aware may be insufficient or we may be unable to recover such award.

Current wording

We rely on third parties to operate critical business systems or to process sensitive information in a variety of contexts, including without limitation, cloud-based infrastructure, personnel email, data hosting, and other functions. Our ability to monitor these third parties’ information security practices is limited and they may not have adequate information security measures in place. If they were to experience a security incident or other interruption, we could also experience adverse consequences. While we may be entitled to damages if those third parties fail to satisfy their privacy or security-related obligations to us, any aware may be insufficient or we may be unable to recover such award.

Previous wording

In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position. Additionally, sensitive information of ours could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our personnel’s or vendors’ use of AI technologies, including generative AI, and machine learning, or ML, technologies, referred to collectively as AI/ML technologies. Any sensitive information (including confidential, competitive, proprietary, or personal data) that we input into a third-party generative AI/ML platform could be leaked or disclosed to others, including if sensitive information is used to train the third parties’ AI/ML model. Additionally, where an AI/ML model ingests personal data and makes connections using such data, those technologies may reveal other personal or sensitive information generated by the model.

Current wording

In addition to experiencing a security incident, third parties may gather, collect, or infer sensitive information about us from public sources, data brokers, or other means that reveals competitively sensitive details about our organization and could be used to undermine our competitive advantage or market position. Additionally, sensitive information of ours could be leaked, disclosed, or revealed as a result of or in connection with our personnel’s or vendors’ use of AI technologies, including generative AI. Any sensitive information (including confidential, competitive, proprietary, or personal data) that we input into a third-party generative AI platform could be leaked or disclosed to others, including if sensitive information is used to train the third parties’ AI technology. Additionally, where an AI technology ingests personal data and makes connections using such data, those technologies may reveal other personal or sensitive information generated by the model.

Previous wording

In both the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions there have been, and we anticipate there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could impact our ability to sell any of our products profitably. In the United States, the federal government enacted healthcare reform legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA. The ACA, among other things, increased the minimum level of Medicaid rebates payable by manufacturers of brand name drugs; required collection of rebates for drugs paid by Medicaid managed care organizations; required manufacturers to participate in a coverage gap discount program, under which they must agree to offer point-of-sale discounts (increased to 70 percent, effective as of January 1, 2019) 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; imposed a non-deductible annual fee on pharmaceutical manufacturers or importers who sell certain “branded prescription drugs” to specified federal government programs, implemented 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 expanded the types of entities eligible for the 340B drug discount program; expanded eligibility criteria for Medicaid programs; created a new Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute to oversee, identify priorities in, and conduct comparative clinical effectiveness research, along with funding for such research; and established a Center for Medicare Innovation at the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, to test innovative payment and service delivery models to lower Medicare and Medicaid spending, potentially including prescription drug spending.

Current wording

In both the United States and certain foreign jurisdictions there have been, and we anticipate there will continue to be, a number of legislative and regulatory changes to the healthcare system that could impact our ability to sell any of our products profitably. In the United States, the federal government enacted healthcare reform legislation, the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, as amended by the Health Care and Education Reconciliation Act, or collectively, the ACA.

Previous wording

There have been amendments to and executive, judicial, and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on August 16, 2022, the Inflation Reduction Act of 2022, or IRA, was signed into law, which among other things, extends enhanced subsidies for individuals purchasing health insurance coverage in ACA marketplaces through plan year 2025. The IRA also eliminates the “donut hole” under the Medicare Part D program beginning in 2025 by significantly lowering the beneficiary maximum out-of-pocket cost and creating a new manufacturer discount program. It is unclear how such challenges, and the healthcare reform measures of the current Trump administration will impact the ACA and our business. For example, on July 4, 2025, the annual reconciliation bill, the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” (“OBBBA”), was signed into law which is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. OBBBA also narrows access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declines to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits, set to expire at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. Additionally, on March 11, 2021, the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 was signed into law, which eliminates the statutory Medicaid drug rebate cap, currently set at 100% of a drug’s average manufacturer price, for single source and innovator multiple source drugs, effective January 1, 2024.

Current wording

There have been amendments to and executive, judicial, and Congressional challenges to certain aspects of the ACA. For example, on July 4, 2025, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or the OBBBA, was signed into law, which narrowed access to ACA marketplace exchange enrollment and declined to extend the ACA enhanced advanced premium tax credits that expired at the end of 2025, which, among other provisions in the law, are anticipated to reduce the number of Americans with health insurance. The OBBBA also is expected to reduce Medicaid spending and enrollment by implementing work requirements for some beneficiaries, capping state-directed payments, reducing federal funding, and limiting provider taxes used to fund the program. Congress is considering proposed legislation intended to further reduce healthcare costs with alternatives to replace the expired ACA subsidies. We expect that additional U.S. federal healthcare reform measures will be adopted in the future, any of which could limit the amounts that the U.S. federal government will pay for healthcare products and services, which could result in reduced demand for our product candidates or additional pricing pressures.

Previous wording

The current Trump administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across the U.S. 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, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce workforce and make program cuts, (2) rescinding a Biden administration executive order tasking the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Innovation, or CMMI, to consider new payment and healthcare models to limit drug spending, (3) eliminating the Biden administration’s executive order that directed HHS to establish an AI task force, developing a strategic plan directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs for Medicare through a variety of initiatives, including by improving upon the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program, (4) directing certain federal agencies to enforce existing law regarding hospital and price plan transparency and by standardizing prices across hospitals and health plans; (5) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical product; (6) directing certain federal agencies to enforce existing law regarding hospital and price plan transparency and by standardizing prices across hospitals and health plans; and (7) as part of the Make America Healthy Again (MAHA) Commission’s recent Strategy Report, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. Additionally, the U.S. Supreme Court’s recent Loper Bright decision described above 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 healthcare-related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

Current wording

The current administration is pursuing policies to reduce regulations and expenditures across government agencies including at HHS, the FDA, the U.S. Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, or CMS, and related agencies. These actions, presently directed by executive orders or memoranda from the Office of Management and Budget, may propose policy changes that create additional uncertainty for our business. For example, the current administration has announced agreements with several pharmaceutical companies that require the drug manufacturers to offer, through a direct to consumer platform, or TrumpRx, U.S. patients and Medicaid programs prescription drug Most-Favored Nation pricing equal to or lower than those paid in other developed nations, with additional mandates for direct-to-patient discounts and repatriation of foreign revenues. Other recent actions, for example, include (1) directing agencies to reduce agency workforce and cut programs; (2) directing HHS and other agencies to lower prescription drug costs through a variety of initiatives; (3) imposing tariffs on imported pharmaceutical products; and (4) as part of the Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, Commission’s Strategy Report released in September 2025, working across government agencies to increase enforcement on direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical advertising. Additionally, the current administration recently called on Congress to enact "The Great Healthcare Plan," to codify and expand Most-Favored Nation pricing, lower government subsidies to private insurance companies, increase healthcare price transparency, expand pharmaceutical drugs available for over-the-counter purchase, and enact restrictions on pharmacy benefit manager, or PBM, payment methodologies, among other things. These actions and policies may significantly reduce U.S. drug prices, potentially impacting manufacturers’ global pricing strategies and profitability, while increasing their operational costs and compliance risks. In June 2024, the U.S. Supreme Court’s Loper Bright decision greatly reduced judicial deference to regulatory agencies, which could increase successful legal challenges to federal regulations affecting our operations. Congress may introduce and ultimately pass health care related legislation that could impact the drug approval process and make changes to the Medicare Drug Price Negotiation Program.

Previous wording

•the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA), which prohibits, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal healthcare program Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

Current wording

•the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act, or HIPAA, which prohibits, among other things, executing a scheme to defraud any healthcare benefit program or making false statements relating to healthcare matters. Similar to the federal healthcare program Anti-Kickback Statute, a person or entity does not need to have actual knowledge of the statute or specific intent to violate it in order to have committed a violation;

Previous wording

•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, and related regulations, which impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information on certain individuals and entities;

Current wording

•HIPAA, as amended by the Health Information Technology for Economic and Clinical Health Act, or HITECH and related regulations, which impose certain requirements relating to the privacy, security and transmission of individually identifiable health information on certain individuals and entities;

Previous wording

•the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act (FDCA), which among other things, strictly regulates drug product marketing, prohibits manufacturers from marketing drug products for off-label use and regulates the distribution of drug samples;

Current wording

•the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act, or FDCA, which among other things, strictly regulates drug product marketing, prohibits manufacturers from marketing drug products for off-label use and regulates the distribution of drug samples;

Previous wording

•state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers, state and local laws requiring the registration of pharmaceutical sales and medical representatives, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; and

Current wording

•state law equivalents of each of the above federal laws, such as anti-kickback and false claims laws which may apply to items or services reimbursed by any third-party payor, including commercial insurers, state and local laws requiring certain regulatory licenses to manufacture or distribute our products commercially and/or the registration of pharmaceutical sales and medical representatives, and state laws governing the privacy and security of health information in certain circumstances, many of which differ from each other in significant ways and often are not preempted by HIPAA, thus complicating compliance efforts; and

Previous wording

•global unrest including geopolitical risks emanating from countries such as Russia and China, terrorist activities, the conflict between Israel and Hamas, bank failures, and other economic and other external factors; and

Current wording

•global unrest including geopolitical risks and conflicts, terrorist activities, bank failures, and other economic and other external factors; and

Previous wording

Under Sections 382 and 383 of the revised Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in the ownership of its equity by certain significant shareholders over a rolling three year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and certain other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income and taxes may be limited. We may have experienced such ownership changes in the past, and we may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of shifts in our share ownership, some of which would be outside our control. If our ability to use our net operating losses and other tax attributes is limited by ownership changes, we may be unable to utilize a material portion of our net operating losses and other tax attributes to offset our future taxable income. In addition, there is also a risk that due to changes in laws and regulations, such as alternative minimum taxes or suspensions on the use of net operating losses, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing net operating losses could expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities.

Current wording

Under Sections 382 and 383 of the revised Internal Revenue Code of 1986, as amended, or the Code, if a corporation undergoes an “ownership change” (generally defined as a greater than 50 percentage point change (by value) in the ownership of its equity by certain significant shareholders over a rolling three year period), the corporation’s ability to use its pre-change net operating loss carryforwards and certain other pre-change tax attributes to offset its post-change income and taxes may be limited. We may have experienced such ownership changes in the past, and we may experience ownership changes in the future as a result of shifts in our share ownership, some of which would be outside our control. If our ability to use our net operating losses and other tax attributes is limited by ownership changes, we may be unable to utilize a material portion of our net operating losses and other tax attributes to offset our future taxable income. In addition, the U.S. federal net operating losses arising in tax years beginning after December 31, 2017 may be carried forward indefinitely, but such net operating loss carryforwards are permitted to be utilized in any taxable year to offset no more than 80% of the taxable income in such year. There is also a risk that due to changes in laws and regulations, such as alternative minimum taxes or suspensions on the use of net operating losses, or other unforeseen reasons, our existing net operating losses could expire or otherwise become unavailable to offset future income tax liabilities.

Previous wording

In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). Numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018,or CCPA, applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, and requires certain businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and honor requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for fines and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. These developments may further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties with whom we work.

Current wording

In the United States, federal, state, and local governments have enacted numerous data privacy and security laws, including data breach notification laws, personal data privacy laws, consumer protection laws (e.g., Section 5 of the Federal Trade Commission Act), and other similar laws (e.g., wiretapping laws). Numerous U.S. states have enacted comprehensive privacy laws that impose certain obligations on covered businesses, including providing specific disclosures in privacy notices and affording residents with certain rights concerning their personal data. As applicable, such rights may include the right to access, correct, or delete certain personal data, and to opt-out of certain data processing activities, such as targeted advertising, profiling, and automated decision-making. The exercise of these rights may impact our business and ability to provide our products and services. Certain states also impose stricter requirements for processing certain personal data, including sensitive information, such as conducting data privacy impact assessments. These state laws allow for statutory fines for noncompliance. For example, the California Consumer Privacy Act of 2018, or CCPA, applies to personal data of consumers, business representatives, and employees who are California residents, and requires certain businesses to provide specific disclosures in privacy notices and respond to requests of such individuals to exercise certain privacy rights. The CCPA provides for fines and allows private litigants affected by certain data breaches to recover significant statutory damages. Similar laws are being considered in several other states, as well as at the federal and local levels, and we expect more states to pass similar laws in the future. These developments may further complicate compliance efforts, and increase legal risk and compliance costs for us and the third parties with whom we work.

Previous wording

as the U.S. Department of Justice’s Rule on Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons.

Current wording

In addition, we may be unable to transfer personal data from Europe and other jurisdictions to the United States or other countries due to data localization requirements or limitations on cross-border data flows. Europe and other jurisdictions have enacted laws requiring data to be localized or limiting the transfer of personal data to other countries. In particular, the UK and the European Economic Area, or EEA, have significantly restricted the transfer of personal data to the United States and other countries whose privacy laws it generally believes are inadequate. Other jurisdictions have in the past and may adopt in the future similarly stringent interpretations of their data localization and cross-border data transfer laws. Although there are currently various mechanisms that may be used to transfer personal data from the EEA and UK to the United States in compliance with law, such as the EEA’s standard contractual clauses, the UK’s International Data Transfer Agreement / Addendum, and the EU-U.S. Data Privacy Framework and the UK extension thereto (which allows for transfers to relevant U.S.-based organizations who self-certify compliance and participate in the Framework), these mechanisms are subject to legal challenges, and there is no assurance that we can satisfy or rely on these measures to lawfully transfer personal data to the United States. If there is no lawful manner for us to transfer personal data from the EEA, the UK, or other jurisdictions to the United States, or if the requirements for a legally-compliant transfer are too onerous, we could face significant adverse consequences, including the interruption or degradation of our operations, the need to relocate part of or all of our business or data processing activities to other jurisdictions (such as Europe) at significant expense, increased exposure to regulatory actions, substantial fines and penalties, the inability to transfer data and work with partners, vendors and other third parties, and injunctions against our processing or transferring of personal data necessary to operate our business. Additionally, companies that transfer personal data out of the EEA and UK to other jurisdictions, particularly to the United States, are subject to increased scrutiny from regulators, individual litigants, and activities groups. Some European regulators have ordered certain companies to suspend or permanently cease certain transfers of personal data out of Europe for allegedly violating the GDPR’s cross-border data transfer limitations. Other jurisdictions have adopted or may adopt stringent data localization and cross-border data transfer laws, such as the U.S. Department of Justice’s Rule on Preventing Access to U.S. Sensitive Personal Data and Government-Related Data by Countries of Concern or Covered Persons.

Previous wording

Our personnel and certain third parties with whom we work may use generative AI and/or automated decision-making technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws regulating AI and/or automated decision-making technologies. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use AI and/or automated decision-making technologies, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages. Due to inaccuracies or flaws in the inputs, outputs, or logic of the AI/ML, AI models could be biased and could lead us to make decisions that could bias certain individuals (or classes of individuals), and adversely impact their rights, employment, and ability to obtain certain pricing, products, services, or benefits.

Current wording

Our personnel and certain third parties with whom we work may use generative AI and/or automated decision-making technologies to perform their work, and the disclosure and use of personal data in AI technologies is subject to various privacy laws and other privacy obligations. Governments have passed and are likely to pass additional laws regulating AI and/or automated decision-making technologies, such as the EU’s AI Act, the Colorado Artificial Intelligence Act, California Bot Disclosure Law, the Utah Artificial Intelligence Policy Act, and the CCPA regulations on automated decision-making technology. Our use of this technology could result in additional compliance costs, regulatory investigations and actions, and lawsuits. If we are unable to use AI and/or automated decision-making technologies, it could make our business less efficient and result in competitive disadvantages. Due to inaccuracies or flaws in the inputs, outputs, or logic of the AI technology, AI models could be biased and could lead us to make decisions that could bias certain individuals (or classes of individuals), and adversely impact their rights, employment, and ability to obtain certain pricing, products, services, or benefits.

Previous wording

Obligations related to data privacy and security (and consumers’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which has in the past and may in the future be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources and may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf.

Current wording

Obligations related to data privacy and security (and individuals’ data privacy expectations) are quickly changing, becoming increasingly stringent, and creating uncertainty. Additionally, these obligations may be subject to differing applications and interpretations, which has in the past and may in the future be inconsistent or conflict among jurisdictions. Preparing for and complying with these obligations requires us to devote significant resources and may necessitate changes to our services, information technologies, systems, and practices and to those of any third parties that process personal data on our behalf.