Structure Therapeutics Inc.

Previous wording

Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We are a clinical stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history, which may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business to date and assess our future viability. Since our inception in 2016, we have focused primarily on organizing and staffing our company, business planning, establishing our intellectual property portfolio, raising capital, developing our structure-based drug discovery platform, identifying and developing our product candidates, conducting preclinical studies and, more recently, clinical trials, and providing general and administrative support for these operations. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our structure-based drug discovery platform is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed in clinical development or, if approved, commercially. Further, aleniglipron, our product candidate for obesity, overweight and related conditions, ACCG-2671 and ACCG-3535, our oral small molecule amylin receptor agonist development candidates for the treatment of obesity, LTSE-2578, our product candidate for IPF, are in early clinical development and our other product candidates and programs are in preclinical development or discovery stages. Accordingly, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing biopharmaceutical products.

Current wording

Biopharmaceutical product development is a highly speculative undertaking and involves a substantial degree of risk. We are a clinical-stage biopharmaceutical company with a limited operating history, which may make it difficult to evaluate the success of our business to date and assess our future viability. Since our inception in 2016, we have focused primarily on organizing and staffing our company, business planning, establishing our intellectual property portfolio, raising capital, developing our structure-based drug discovery platform, identifying and developing our product candidates, conducting preclinical studies and, more recently, clinical trials, and providing general and administrative support for these operations. Our approach to the discovery and development of product candidates based on our structure-based drug discovery platform is unproven, and we do not know whether we will be able to develop any product candidates that succeed in clinical development or, if approved, commercially. Further, aleniglipron, our product candidate for obesity, overweight and related conditions; ACCG-2671 and ACCG-3535, our oral small molecule amylin receptor agonist development candidates for the treatment of obesity; and LTSE-2578, our product candidate for IPF, are in clinical development and our other product candidates and programs are in preclinical development or discovery stages. Accordingly, we have not yet demonstrated an ability to successfully obtain regulatory approvals, manufacture a commercial scale product or arrange for a third party to do so on our behalf, or conduct sales and marketing activities necessary for successful product commercialization. Consequently, any predictions made about our future success or viability may not be as accurate as they could be if we had a history of successfully developing and commercializing biopharmaceutical products.

Previous wording

We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue to date, and we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred significant losses since our inception and expect to continue to incur significant and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years. Our net losses were $182.1 million and $141.2 million for the six months ended June 30, 2026 and year ended December 31, 2025, respectively. As of June 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $652.4 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. All of our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources, including additional funding to conduct Phase 3 clinical trials of aleniglipron, before we would be able to apply for or receive marketing approvals and begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we continue our development of, seek marketing approval for and potentially commercialize any of our product candidates, recruit and maintain key personnel and seek to identify, assess, acquire, in-license or develop additional product candidates.

Current wording

We have no products approved for commercial sale and have not generated any revenue to date, and we continue to incur significant research and development and other expenses related to our ongoing operations. As a result, we are not profitable and have incurred significant losses since our inception and expect to continue to incur significant and increasing operating losses for at least the next several years. Our net losses were $326.9 million and $141.2 million for the nine months ended September 30, 2026 and year ended December 31, 2025, respectively. As of September 30, 2026, we had an accumulated deficit of $797.2 million. Substantially all of our losses have resulted from expenses incurred in connection with our research and development programs and from general and administrative costs associated with our operations. All of our product candidates will require substantial additional development time and resources, including additional funding to conduct Phase 3 clinical trials of aleniglipron, before we would be able to apply for or receive marketing approvals and begin generating revenue from product sales. We expect to continue to incur losses for the foreseeable future, and we anticipate that our expenses will increase substantially as we continue our development of, seek marketing approval for and potentially commercialize any of our product candidates, recruit and maintain key personnel and seek to identify, assess, acquire, in-license or develop additional product candidates.

Previous wording

Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, as of June 30, 2026, will be sufficient to fund our projected operations and key clinical milestones through the end of 2028. This includes costs related to the ongoing aleniglipron ACCESS OLE, ACCESS II extension trial, the supplementary trials, and Phase 3 registrational program in chronic weight management, but excludes additional costs related to pre-commercialization activities including commercial manufacturing. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our operating plan may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including potentially grants, collaborations, licenses and other similar

Current wording

Based on our current operating plan, we believe that our cash, cash equivalents and short-term investments, as of September 30, 2026, will be sufficient to fund our projected operations and key clinical milestones through the end of 2028. This includes costs related to the ongoing aleniglipron ACCESS OLE, ACCESS II extension trial, the supplementary trials, and Phase 3 registrational program in chronic weight management, but excludes additional costs related to pre-commercialization activities including commercial manufacturing. We have based these estimates on assumptions that may prove to be wrong, and we could use our capital resources sooner than we currently expect. Our operating plan may change as a result of many factors currently unknown to us, and we may need to seek additional funds sooner than planned, through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including potentially grants, collaborations, licenses and

Previous wording

arrangements. Even if we believe we have sufficient capital for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic considerations.

Current wording

other similar arrangements. Even if we believe we have sufficient capital for our current or future operating plans, we may seek additional capital if market conditions are favorable or if we have specific strategic considerations.

Previous wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our operations through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including potentially grants, collaborations, licenses or other similar arrangements. For example, (i) in October 2023, we issued and sold an aggregate of 21,617,295 ordinary shares and 2,401,920 newly designated non-voting ordinary shares; (ii) in June 2024, we issued and sold an aggregate of 10,427,017 ADSs; (iii) in August 2025, we entered into a sales agreement (the “ATM Sales Agreement”) with Leerink Partners LLC and Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., pursuant to which we may offer and sell our ADSs in at-the-market offerings, initially up to an aggregate offering price of $250.0 million, and in September 2025, we sold 3,040,000 ADSs under the ATM Sales Agreement; and in May 2026, we amended and restated the ATM Sales Agreement (the "Amended and Restated Sales Agreement") to remove the aggregate offering cap and filed a prospectus supplement registering an additional $150.0 million in ADSs available to be sold thereunder, for an aggregate offering price of up to $400.0 million (as of the date of this Quarterly Report, approximately $341.5 million remained available for sale); and (iv) in December 2025, we issued and sold an aggregate of 9,961,538 ADSs and, in lieu of ADSs, pre-funded warrants to purchase ordinary shares represented by 1,538,462 ADSs. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our shareholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our ADS holders. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, make capital expenditures or declare dividends. If we raise funds through collaborations or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may be required to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us.

Current wording

Until such time, if ever, as we can generate substantial product revenue, we expect to finance our operations through equity offerings, debt financings or other capital sources, including potentially grants, collaborations, licenses or other similar arrangements. For example, (i) in October 2023, we issued and sold an aggregate of 21,617,295 ordinary shares and 2,401,920 newly designated non-voting ordinary shares; (ii) in June 2024, we issued and sold an aggregate of 10,427,017 ADSs; (iii) in August 2025, we entered into a sales agreement (the “ATM Sales Agreement”) with Leerink Partners LLC and Cantor Fitzgerald & Co., pursuant to which we may offer and sell our ADSs in at-the-market offerings, initially up to an aggregate offering amount of $250.0 million, and in September 2025, we sold 3,040,000 ADSs under the ATM Sales Agreement; and in May 2026, we amended and restated the ATM Sales Agreement (the “Amended and Restated Sales Agreement”) to remove the aggregate offering cap and filed a prospectus supplement registering an additional $150.0 million in ADSs available to be sold thereunder, for an aggregate offering amount of up to $400.0 million (as of the date of this Quarterly Report, approximately $341.5 million remained available for sale); and (iv) in December 2025, we issued and sold an aggregate of 9,961,538 ADSs and, in lieu of ADSs, pre-funded warrants to purchase ordinary shares represented by 1,538,462 ADSs. To the extent that we raise additional capital through the sale of equity or convertible debt securities, the ownership interest of our shareholders will be diluted, and the terms of these securities may include liquidation or other preferences that adversely affect the rights of our ADS holders. Debt financing, if available, may involve agreements that include covenants limiting or restricting our ability to take specific actions, such as limitations on our ability to incur additional debt, make capital expenditures or declare dividends. If we raise funds through collaborations or licensing arrangements with third parties, we may be required to relinquish valuable rights to our technologies, future revenue streams, research programs or product candidates or grant licenses on terms that may not be favorable to us.

Previous wording

We are early in our development efforts and only have four product candidates in early clinical development — aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535 and LTSE-2578. All of our other development programs are in the preclinical or discovery stage. If we are unable to advance our product candidates in clinical development, obtain regulatory approval and ultimately commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Current wording

We are early in our development efforts and only have four product candidates in clinical development — aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535 and LTSE-2578. All of our other development programs are in the preclinical or discovery stage. If we are unable to advance our product candidates in clinical development, obtain regulatory approval and ultimately commercialize our product candidates, or experience significant delays in doing so, our business will be materially harmed.

Previous wording

We are in the early stages of our development efforts and have four product candidates, aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535 and LTSE-2578, in early clinical development.

Current wording

We are in the early stages of our development efforts and have four product candidates, aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535 and LTSE-2578, in clinical development.

Previous wording

Clinical drug development is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Our clinical trials may not be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, and failure can occur at any time during the preclinical study or clinical trial process. For example, we depend on the availability of non-human primates (“NHPs”) to conduct certain preclinical studies that we are required to complete prior to submitting an IND and initiating clinical development. There is currently a global shortage of NHPs available for drug development. This has caused the cost of obtaining NHPs for our preclinical studies to increase dramatically and, if the shortage continues, could also result in delays to our development timelines. Despite promising preclinical or clinical results, any product candidate can unexpectedly fail at any stage of preclinical or clinical development. The historical failure rate for product candidates in our industry is high. Furthermore, the results from clinical trials or preclinical studies of a product candidate may not predict the results of later clinical trials of the product candidate, and interim results of a clinical trial are not necessarily indicative of final results. For example, the preliminary topline nature of aleniglipron results, the length of the trial and sample size may render these results not necessarily indicative of the results for our future clinical trials for aleniglipron and may not be comparable to other weight loss products or product candidates, including other oral selective GLP-1RAs. In addition, given the size of the Phase 2a obesity cohort, the primary efficacy endpoint of weight loss was calculated using LSM and analyzed based on the primary efficacy estimand using a mixed model for repeated measures. This means that we drew on all available data, including data from patients that did not follow-up at 12 weeks. The model estimates how patients with missing data would have responded based on patients who continued the trial and had similar baseline characteristics (implicit imputation). Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy characteristics despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. In particular, while we have conducted, or are conducting certain preclinical studies of our product candidates, the predictive value of these trials with respect to future testing in humans is limited, particularly in indications where animal models are less developed.

Current wording

Clinical drug development is expensive and can take many years to complete, and its outcome is inherently uncertain. Our clinical trials may not be conducted as planned or completed on schedule, if at all, and failure can occur at any time during the preclinical study or clinical trial process. For example, we depend on the availability of non-human primates (“NHPs”) to conduct certain preclinical studies that we are required to complete prior to submitting an IND and initiating clinical development. There is currently a global shortage of NHPs available for drug development. This has caused the cost of obtaining NHPs for our preclinical studies to increase dramatically and, if the shortage continues, could also result in delays to our development timelines. Despite promising preclinical or clinical results, any product candidate can unexpectedly fail at any stage of preclinical or clinical development. The historical failure rate for product candidates in our industry is high. Furthermore, the results from clinical trials or preclinical studies of a product candidate may not predict the results of later clinical trials of the product candidate, and interim results of a clinical trial are not necessarily indicative of final results. For example, the preliminary topline nature of aleniglipron results, the length of the trial and sample size may render these results not necessarily indicative of the results for our future clinical trials for aleniglipron and may not be comparable to other weight loss products or product candidates, including other oral selective GLP-1RAs. In addition, given the size of the Phase 2a obesity cohort, the primary efficacy endpoint of weight loss was calculated using the least squares method (“LSM”) and analyzed based on the primary efficacy estimand using a mixed model for repeated measures. This means that we drew on all available data, including data from patients that did not follow-up at 12 weeks. The model estimates how patients with missing data would have responded based on patients who continued the trial and had similar baseline characteristics (implicit imputation). Product candidates in later stages of clinical trials may fail to show the desired safety and efficacy characteristics despite having progressed through preclinical studies and initial clinical trials. In particular, while we have conducted, or are conducting certain preclinical studies of our product candidates, the predictive value of these trials with respect to future testing in humans is limited, particularly in indications where animal models are less developed.

Previous wording

During the conduct of clinical trials, patients report changes in their health, including illnesses, injuries and discomforts, to their doctor. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not the product candidate being studied caused these conditions. Regulatory authorities may draw different conclusions or require additional testing to confirm these determinations, if they occur. In addition, it is possible that as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials with a broader group of patients, or as use of these product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive marketing approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other AEs that were observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, will be reported by participants. Many times, side effects are only detectable after investigational product candidates are tested in large-scale, Phase 3 trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. If additional clinical experience indicates that any of our current product candidates and any future product candidates has serious or life-threatening side effects or other side effects that outweigh the potential therapeutic benefit, the development of the product candidate may fail or be delayed, or, if the product candidate has received marketing approval, such approval may be revoked, which would harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. In particular, because we are developing our product candidates for chronic indications, the FDA and applicable foreign authorities will likely require that our product candidates demonstrate a higher level of safety over a longer period of time than would be the case for product candidates intended for short-term use. Moreover, if we elect, or are required, to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenue through their sale may be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Current wording

During the conduct of clinical trials, patients report changes in their health, including illnesses, injuries and discomforts, to their doctor. Often, it is not possible to determine whether or not the product candidate being studied caused these conditions. Regulatory authorities may draw different conclusions or require additional testing to confirm these determinations, if they occur. In addition, it is possible that as we test our product candidates in larger, longer and more extensive clinical trials with a broader group of patients, or as use of these product candidates becomes more widespread if they receive marketing approval, illnesses, injuries, discomforts and other AEs that were observed in earlier trials, as well as conditions that did not occur or went undetected in previous trials, will be reported by participants. Many times, side effects are only detectable after investigational product candidates are tested in large-scale, Phase 3 trials or, in some cases, after they are made available to patients on a commercial scale after approval. If additional clinical experience indicates that any of our current product candidates and any future product candidates have serious or life-threatening side effects or other side effects that outweigh the potential therapeutic benefit, the development of the product candidate may fail or be delayed, or, if the product candidate has received marketing approval, such approval may be revoked, which would harm our business, prospects, operating results and financial condition. In particular, because we are developing our product candidates for chronic indications, the FDA and applicable foreign authorities will likely require that our product candidates demonstrate a higher level of safety over a longer period of time than would be the case for product candidates intended for short-term use. Moreover, if we elect, or are required, to delay, suspend or terminate any clinical trial of our product candidates, the commercial prospects of our product candidates may be harmed and our ability to generate revenue through their sale may be delayed or eliminated. Any of these occurrences may harm our business, financial condition and prospects significantly.

Previous wording

limit the commercial value for the product candidate if approved. We may also be required to modify our trial plans based on findings in our ongoing clinical trials. In our completed Phase 1 SAD and Phase 1b MAD trial of aleniglipron, the following adverse events occurred and were considered probably or possibly related to the trial drug: nausea, headache, vomiting, dehydration, decreased appetite, dizziness, and diarrhea. In our completed Phase 2a trial of aleniglipron, the following adverse events occurred and were considered probably or possibly related to the trial drug: nausea, headache, vomiting, decreased appetite, dyspepsia, and diarrhea. In our aleniglipron ACCESS II trial, the following adverse events occurred and were considered probably or possibly related to the trial drug: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, constipation and abdominal distention. However, further analysis may reveal AEs inconsistent with the safety results observed. Many compounds that initially showed promise in early-stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound.

Current wording

limit the commercial value for the product candidate if approved. We may also be required to modify our trial plans based on findings in our ongoing clinical trials. In our completed Phase 1 SAD and Phase 1b MAD trial of aleniglipron, the following adverse events occurred and were considered probably or possibly related to the trial drug: nausea, headache, vomiting, dehydration, decreased appetite, dizziness, and diarrhea. In our completed Phase 2a trial of aleniglipron, the following adverse events occurred and were considered probably or possibly related to the trial drug: nausea, headache, vomiting, decreased appetite, dyspepsia, and diarrhea. In our aleniglipron ACCESS II trial, the following adverse events occurred and were considered probably or possibly related to the trial drug: nausea, vomiting, diarrhea, headache, constipation and abdominal distention. In our completed Phase 1 SAD trial of ACCG-2671, no nausea or vomiting was reported at the placebo, 1 mg or 2 mg dose levels; however, dose-related gastrointestinal AEs emerged at higher doses, with nausea reported in four of five participants and vomiting reported in three of five participants at the 5 mg dose, and both nausea and vomiting reported in all six participants at the 10 mg dose. These findings informed the starting doses and titration strategy for the ongoing MAD portion of the Phase 1/2a clinical trial of ACCG-2671, but we cannot guarantee that the titration strategy we have adopted will sufficiently mitigate these or other gastrointestinal or dose-related AEs as we continue to evaluate ACCG-2671. However, further analysis may reveal AEs inconsistent with the safety results observed. Many compounds that initially showed promise in early-stage testing have later been found to cause side effects that prevented further development of the compound.

Previous wording

As an organization, we have never conducted later-stage clinical trials or submitted an NDA and may be unable to do so for any of our product candidates.

Current wording

As an organization, we have never completed later-stage clinical trials or submitted an NDA and may be unable to do so for any of our product candidates.

Previous wording

product candidate. We also plan to conduct a number of clinical trials for multiple product candidates in parallel over the next several years. This may be a difficult process to manage with our limited resources and may divert the attention of management. In addition, we are currently planning for later stage interactions with FDA, and other foreign regulatory agencies; however, we cannot guarantee timely feedback or alignment on our clinical trial designs, Phase 3 dose rationale and overall size of the data base needed for any future marketing applications. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to regulatory submission and approval of any of our product candidates. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining marketing approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in submitting NDAs for and commercializing our product candidates.

Current wording

We are early in our development efforts for our product candidates, and we will need to successfully complete pivotal clinical trials in order to seek FDA or applicable foreign authority approval to market aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535, LTSE-2578 and any future product candidates we may develop. Carrying out clinical trials and the submission of NDAs is complicated. We have not completed any later-stage or pivotal clinical trials, have limited experience as a company in preparing, submitting and prosecuting regulatory filings and have not previously submitted an NDA or other applicable foreign regulatory submission for any product candidate. We also plan to conduct a number of clinical trials for multiple product candidates in parallel over the next several years. This may be a difficult process to manage with our limited resources and may divert the attention of management. In addition, we have limited experience in later-stage interactions with FDA, and other foreign regulatory agencies and we cannot guarantee timely feedback or alignment on our future clinical trial designs, dose rationale and overall size of the database needed for any future marketing applications. Consequently, we may be unable to successfully and efficiently execute and complete necessary clinical trials in a way that leads to regulatory submission and approval of any of our product candidates. We may require more time and incur greater costs than our competitors and may not succeed in obtaining marketing approvals of product candidates that we develop. Failure to commence or complete, or delays in, our planned clinical trials, could prevent us from or delay us in submitting NDAs for and commercializing our product candidates.

Previous wording

designation, however, neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the targeted indication, then the drug is entitled to a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity that precludes the applicable regulatory authority from approving another marketing application for the same chemical entity for the same indication for the exclusivity period except in limited situations, 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. For purposes of small molecule drugs, the FDA defines “same drug” as a drug that contains the same active moiety and is intended for the same use as the drug in question. A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan drug designation.

Current wording

Regulatory authorities in some jurisdictions, including the United States, may designate drugs for relatively small patient populations as orphan drugs. Under the Orphan Drug Act of 1983, the FDA may designate a drug as an orphan drug if it is a drug intended to treat a rare disease or condition, which is generally defined as a patient population of fewer than 200,000 individuals in the United States, or a patient population of greater than 200,000 individuals in the United States but for which there is no reasonable expectation that the cost of developing the drug will be recovered from sales in the United States alone. In the United States, orphan drug designation entitles a party to financial incentives such as opportunities for grant funding towards clinical trial costs, tax advantages and application fee waivers. After the FDA grants orphan drug designation, the generic identity of the drug and its potential orphan use are disclosed publicly by the FDA. Orphan drug designation, however, neither shortens the development time or regulatory review time of a drug nor gives the drug any advantage in the regulatory review or approval process. Generally, if a drug with an orphan drug designation subsequently receives the first marketing approval for the targeted indication, then the drug is entitled to a seven-year period of marketing exclusivity that precludes the applicable regulatory authority from approving another marketing application for the same chemical entity for the same indication for the exclusivity period except in limited situations, 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. For purposes of small molecule drugs, the FDA defines “same drug” as a drug that contains the same active moiety and is intended for the same use as the drug in question. A designated orphan drug may not receive orphan drug exclusivity if it is approved for a use that is broader than the indication for which it received orphan drug designation.

Previous wording

We have conducted, or plan to conduct, our initial clinical trials for aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535, LTSE-2578 and our other product candidates outside of the United States. However, the FDA and other foreign equivalents may not accept data from such trials, in which case our development plans will be delayed, which could materially harm our business.

Current wording

We have conducted, or plan to conduct some of our initial clinical trials for aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535, LTSE-2578 and our other product candidates outside of the United States. However, the FDA and other foreign equivalents may not accept data from such trials, in which case our development plans will be delayed, which could materially harm our business.

Previous wording

We have conducted our initial clinical trials for aleniglipron in Australia, and may conduct our Phase 1 trials for other drug candidates in Australia, China or other foreign countries. The acceptance of trial data from clinical trials conducted outside the United States or another jurisdiction by the FDA or applicable foreign authority may be subject to certain conditions or may not be accepted at all. In cases where data from foreign clinical trials are intended to serve as the sole basis for marketing approval in the United States, the FDA will generally not approve the application on the basis of foreign data alone unless (i) the data are applicable to the U.S. population and U.S. medical practice; (ii) the trials were performed by clinical investigators of recognized competence and pursuant to good clinical practices (“GCP”) regulations; and (iii) the data may be considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign trial data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the trial is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the trial through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any applicable foreign authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any applicable foreign authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may

Current wording

considered valid without the need for an on-site inspection by the FDA, or if the FDA considers such inspection to be necessary, the FDA is able to validate the data through an on-site inspection or other appropriate means. In addition, even where the foreign trial data are not intended to serve as the sole basis for approval, the FDA will not accept the data as support for an application for marketing approval unless the trial is well-designed and well-conducted in accordance with GCP requirements and the FDA is able to validate the data from the trial through an onsite inspection if deemed necessary. Many foreign regulatory authorities have similar approval requirements. In addition, such foreign trials would be subject to the applicable local laws of the foreign jurisdictions where the trials are conducted. There can be no assurance that the FDA or any applicable foreign authority will accept data from trials conducted outside of the United States or the applicable jurisdiction. If the FDA or any applicable foreign authority does not accept such data, it would result in the need for additional trials, which could be costly and time-consuming, and which may result in current or future product candidates that we may develop not receiving approval for commercialization in the applicable jurisdiction.

Previous wording

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our clinical trials, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the topline or preliminary data we previously made public. As a result, topline and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between topline, preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. For example, topline results and the length of the study and sample size may render the results of our prior aleniglipron trials not necessarily indicative of the results for our future clinical trials for aleniglipron and may not be comparable to other weight loss products or product candidates, including other oral selective GLP-1RAs. In addition, given the size of the Phase 2a obesity cohort, the primary efficacy endpoint of weight loss was calculated using LSM and analyzed based on the primary efficacy estimand using a mixed model for repeated measures. This means that we drew on all available data, including data from patients that did not follow-up at 12 weeks. The model estimates how patients with missing data would have responded based on patients who continued the trial and had similar baseline characteristics (implicit imputation). Due to the preliminary nature of these results and the length of the trial and sample size, these results are not necessarily indicative of the final results for our clinical trials for aleniglipron. If the final data is materially different from the preliminary topline data reported, this could significantly harm our business prospects.

Current wording

From time to time, we may publicly disclose interim, preliminary or topline data from our clinical trials, which are based on a preliminary analysis of then-available data, and the results and related findings and conclusions are subject to change following a more comprehensive review of the data related to the particular study or trial. We also make assumptions, estimations, calculations and conclusions as part of our analyses of data, and we may not have received or had the opportunity to fully and carefully evaluate all data. As a result, the topline or preliminary results that we report may differ from future results of the same trials, or different conclusions or considerations may qualify such results, once additional data have been received and fully evaluated. Topline and preliminary data also remain subject to audit and verification procedures that may result in the final data being materially different from the topline or preliminary data we previously made public. As a result, topline and preliminary data should be viewed with caution until the final data are available. From time to time, we may also disclose interim data from our clinical trials. Interim data from clinical trials that we may complete are subject to the risk that one or more of the clinical outcomes may materially change as patient enrollment continues and more patient data become available. Adverse differences between topline, preliminary or interim data and final data could significantly harm our business prospects. For example, topline results and the length of the study and sample size may render the results of our prior aleniglipron trials not necessarily indicative of the results for our future clinical trials for aleniglipron and may not be comparable to other weight loss products or product candidates, including other oral selective GLP-1RAs. In addition, given the size of the Phase 2a obesity cohort, the primary efficacy endpoint of weight

Previous wording

We operate in a global economy, which includes utilizing third-party suppliers in several countries outside the United States. There is inherent risk, based on the complex relationships among the United States and the countries in which we conduct our business, that political, diplomatic and national security factors can lead to global trade restrictions and changes in trade policies and export regulations that may adversely affect our business and operations. The current international trade and regulatory environment is subject to significant ongoing uncertainty including related legal challenges. The U.S. government has recently announced substantial new tariffs affecting a wide range of products and jurisdictions and has indicated an intention to continue developing new trade policies, including with respect to the pharmaceutical industry. In response, certain foreign governments have announced or implemented retaliatory tariffs and other protectionist measures. These developments have created a dynamic and unpredictable trade landscape, which may adversely impact our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. The Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, has initiated an investigation to determine whether pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug product, manufactured outside the United States pose a national security risk and should be subject to additional tariffs.

Current wording

ongoing uncertainty including related legal challenges. The U.S. government has recently announced substantial new tariffs affecting a wide range of products and jurisdictions and has indicated an intention to continue developing new trade policies, including with respect to the pharmaceutical industry. In response, certain foreign governments have announced or implemented retaliatory tariffs and other protectionist measures. These developments have created a dynamic and unpredictable trade landscape, which may adversely impact our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects. The Bureau of Industry and Security, U.S. Department of Commerce, has initiated an investigation to determine whether pharmaceutical ingredients, including finished drug product, manufactured outside the United States pose a national security risk and should be subject to additional tariffs.

Previous wording

testing, as well as for manufacture of any products that we may commercialize, if approved. Currently, the active pharmaceutical ingredients (“APIs”) and drug product are manufactured in China. We also rely on specialized laboratory equipment, supplies, materials and precursor compounds, all or part of which we believe may be ultimately sourced from multiple countries outside the United States, to advance our research and development efforts.

Current wording

We do not own or operate, and currently have no plans to establish, any manufacturing facilities. We currently rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates for clinical testing, as well as for manufacture of any products that we may commercialize, if approved. Currently, the active pharmaceutical ingredients (“APIs”) and drug product are manufactured in China. We also rely on specialized laboratory equipment, supplies, materials and precursor compounds, all or part of which we believe may be ultimately sourced from multiple countries outside the United States, to advance our research and development efforts.

Previous wording

The ability of the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products or take action with respect to other regulatory matters can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, leadership changes, the ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept payment of user fees, the availability of personnel and other resources, changes in statutes, regulations and policies that affect the FDA’s or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions, and other business disruptions. Average review times at the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC

Current wording

The ability of the FDA or other comparable foreign regulatory authorities to review and approve new products or take action with respect to other regulatory matters can be affected by a variety of factors, including government budget and funding levels, leadership changes, the ability to hire and retain key personnel and accept payment of user fees, the availability of personnel and other resources, changes in statutes, regulations and policies that affect the FDA’s or comparable foreign regulatory authorities’ ability to perform routine functions, and other business disruptions. Average review times at the FDA and comparable foreign regulatory authorities have fluctuated in recent years as a result. In addition, government funding of the SEC and other government agencies on which our operations may rely, including those that fund research and development activities, is subject to the political process, which is inherently fluid and unpredictable.

Previous wording

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities and have no plans to build our own clinical or commercial scale manufacturing capabilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and related raw materials for preclinical and clinical development, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval. This reliance increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products, if approved, or such quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts. Our APIs and drug product for our product candidates are currently provided by a supplier, WuXi STA, a subsidiary of WuXi AppTec, and we expect to rely on this supplier for the foreseeable future. Contract manufacturing organizations may become subject to legislation, trade restrictions, sanctions, and other regulatory requirements by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such entities, thereby potentially disrupting the supply of material to us. For example, on December 18, 2025, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (the “NDAA”) was signed into law, which includes the BIOSECURE Act that prohibits the U.S. government from procuring biotechnology equipment or services from “biotechnology companies of concern,” and would prohibit U.S. government contracts, loans and grants to any entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from a designated “biotechnology company of concern.” The Office of Management and Budget will issue a list of “biotechnology companies of concern” no later than mid-December 2026. “Biotechnology company of concern” is defined under the BIOSECURE Act to include (i) certain companies identified on the U.S. Department of Defense’s “Chinese military companies operating in the United States” list (the “1260H List”), (ii) companies that the Office of Management and Budget designates as a “biotechnology company of concern” based on certain criteria including whether the entity is subject to the administrative governance structure, direction, control, or

Current wording

We do not own or operate manufacturing facilities and have no plans to build our own clinical or commercial scale manufacturing capabilities. We rely, and expect to continue to rely, on third parties for the manufacture of our product candidates and related raw materials for preclinical and clinical development, as well as for commercial manufacture if any of our product candidates receive marketing approval. This reliance increases the risk that we will not have sufficient quantities of our product candidates or products, if approved, or such quantities at an acceptable cost or quality, which could delay, prevent or impair our development or commercialization efforts. Our APIs and drug product for our product candidates are currently provided by a supplier, WuXi STA, a subsidiary of WuXi AppTec, and we expect to rely on this supplier for the foreseeable future. Contract manufacturing organizations may become subject to legislation, trade restrictions, sanctions, and other regulatory requirements by the U.S. government, which could restrict or even prohibit our ability to work with such entities, thereby potentially disrupting the supply of material to us. For example, on December 18, 2025, the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2026 (the “NDAA”) was signed into law, which includes the BIOSECURE Act that prohibits the U.S. government from procuring biotechnology equipment or services from “biotechnology companies of concern,” and would prohibit U.S. government contracts, loans and grants to any entity that uses biotechnology equipment or services from a designated “biotechnology company of concern.” The Office of Management and Budget will issue a list of “biotechnology companies of concern” no later than mid-December 2026. “Biotechnology company of concern” is defined under the BIOSECURE Act to include (i) certain companies identified on the U.S. Department of Defense’s “Chinese military companies operating in the United States” list (the “1260H List”), (ii) companies that the Office of Management and Budget designates as a “biotechnology company of concern” based on certain criteria including whether the entity is subject to the administrative governance structure, direction, control, or operates on behalf of a foreign adversary, is involved in the manufacture, distribution, provision, or procurement of a biotechnology equipment or service, and poses a risk to U.S. national security based on engagement with, being supported by, or being affiliated with a foreign adversary’s military, internal security

Previous wording

operates on behalf of a foreign adversary, is involved in the manufacture, distribution, provision, or procurement of a biotechnology equipment or service, and poses a risk to U.S. national security based on engagement with, being supported by, or being affiliated with a foreign adversary’s military, internal security forces, or intelligence agencies and its multiomic data (genomic information) collection and provision practices, and (iii) certain subsidiaries or parent or successor entities of the foregoing. On June 8, 2026, an update to the 1260H List was issued and Wuxi AppTec was added to such list.

Current wording

forces, or intelligence agencies and its multiomic data (genomic information) collection and provision practices, and (iii) certain subsidiaries or parent or successor entities of the foregoing. On June 8, 2026, an update to the 1260H List was issued and Wuxi AppTec was added to such list.

Previous wording

In the event that any of our manufacturers fails to comply with applicable requirements or to perform its obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, including due to the impact of future global pandemics, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we currently do not have the capabilities or

Current wording

In the event that any of our manufacturers fails to comply with applicable requirements or to perform its obligations to us in relation to quality, timing or otherwise, or if our supply of components or other materials becomes limited or interrupted for other reasons, including due to the impact of future global pandemics, we may be forced to manufacture the materials ourselves, for which we currently do not have the capabilities or resources, or enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. In some

Previous wording

resources, or enter into an agreement with another third party, which we may not be able to do on commercially reasonable terms, if at all. In particular, any replacement of our manufacturers could require significant effort and expertise because there may be a limited number of qualified replacements. In some cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such skills or technology to another third party and a feasible alternative may not exist. In addition, certain of our product candidates and our own proprietary methods have never been produced or implemented outside of our company, and we may therefore experience delays to our development programs if and when we attempt to establish new third-party manufacturing arrangements for these product candidates or methods. These factors would increase our reliance on our third-party manufacturers or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturers in order to have another third-party manufacture our product candidates. If we are required to or voluntarily change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. We will also need to verify, such as through a manufacturing comparability study, that any product produced by the new manufacturer is equivalent to that produced in a prior facility. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer and equivalent product could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget.

Current wording

cases, the technical skills or technology required to manufacture our product candidates may be unique or proprietary to the original manufacturer and we may have difficulty transferring such skills or technology to another third party and a feasible alternative may not exist. In addition, certain of our product candidates and our own proprietary methods have never been produced or implemented outside of our company, and we may therefore experience delays to our development programs if and when we attempt to establish new third-party manufacturing arrangements for these product candidates or methods. These factors would increase our reliance on our third-party manufacturers or require us to obtain a license from such manufacturers in order to have another third-party manufacture our product candidates. If we are required to or voluntarily change manufacturers for any reason, we will be required to verify that the new manufacturer maintains facilities and procedures that comply with quality standards and with all applicable regulations and guidelines. We will also need to verify, such as through a manufacturing comparability study, that any product produced by the new manufacturer is equivalent to that produced in a prior facility. The delays associated with the verification of a new manufacturer and equivalent product could negatively affect our ability to develop product candidates in a timely manner or within budget.

Previous wording

We do not currently have the ability to independently conduct certain discovery research, preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates. We rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we expect to have limited influence over their actual performance. We rely upon CROs to monitor and manage data for our clinical programs, as well as the execution of future nonclinical trials. We expect to control only certain aspects of our CROs’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies or clinical trials are conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

Current wording

We do not currently have the ability to independently conduct certain discovery research, preclinical studies and clinical trials for our product candidates. We rely on CROs and clinical trial sites to ensure the proper and timely conduct of our preclinical studies and clinical trials, and we expect to have limited influence over their actual performance. We rely upon CROs to monitor and manage data for our clinical programs, as well as the execution of future nonclinical trials. We expect to control only certain aspects of our CROs’ activities. Nevertheless, we will be responsible for ensuring that each of our preclinical studies or clinical trials is conducted in accordance with the applicable protocol, legal, regulatory and scientific standards and our reliance on the CROs does not relieve us of our regulatory responsibilities.

Previous wording

In October 2020, Lhotse Bio, Inc. (“Lhotse”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a collaboration agreement (the “Lhotse-Schrödinger Agreement”) with Schrödinger LLC. In November 2023, Aconcagua Bio, Inc. (“Aconcagua”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a collaboration agreement (the “Aconcagua-Schrödinger Agreement”) with Schrödinger. Under both agreements, Schrödinger uses its technology platform to perform virtual screens of members of the target class of human integrins, and we and Schrödinger collaborate to facilitate prioritization of targets, perform target validation and analysis, identify leads and perform lead optimization. Schrödinger has granted us an exclusive license to certain intellectual property related to our product candidates discovered under both agreements. See “Collaboration Agreements” in Note 9 to our unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I. Item 1 “Financial Statements” in this Quarterly Report for additional information.

Current wording

In October 2020, Lhotse Bio, Inc. (“Lhotse”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a collaboration agreement (the “Lhotse-Schrödinger Agreement”) with Schrödinger LLC. In November 2023, Aconcagua Bio, Inc. (“Aconcagua”), our wholly-owned subsidiary, entered into a collaboration agreement (the “Aconcagua-Schrödinger Agreement”) with Schrödinger. Under both agreements, Schrödinger agreed to provide computational modeling and design support, including by using its technology platform to perform virtual screens, and Lhotse and Aconcagua agreed to provide day-to-day chemistry and biology support. See “Collaboration Agreements” in Note 9 to our unaudited interim condensed consolidated financial statements in Part I. Item 1 “Financial Statements” in this Quarterly Report for additional information.

Previous wording

Reliance on third parties to manufacture or commercialize our current or any future product candidates, and on collaborations with additional third parties for the development of our current or any future product candidates, requires us to share trade secrets with these third parties. We may also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnerships or similar agreements. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, services agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party

Current wording

Reliance on third parties to manufacture or commercialize our current or any future product candidates, and on collaborations with additional third parties for the development of our current or any future product candidates, requires us to share trade secrets with these third parties. We may also conduct joint research and development programs that may require us to share trade secrets under the terms of our research and development partnerships or similar agreements. We seek to protect our proprietary technology in part by entering into confidentiality agreements and, if applicable, material transfer agreements, services agreements, consulting agreements or other similar agreements with our advisors, employees, third-party contractors and consultants prior to beginning research or disclosing proprietary information. These agreements typically limit the rights of the third parties to use or disclose our confidential information,

Previous wording

The industry in which we compete is characterized by rapid technological advancements, frequent introductions of new products and heavy competition. The discovery of new products and targets remain vital to our success and the implementation by us and by any third-party collaborators of AI technologies and processes, including advanced predictive analytics, computational approaches for drug discovery and so-called “generative” AI, has the potential to provide significant benefits in these areas. Use of AI in our efforts may be difficult to deploy successfully due to operational issues inherent in such methods. In particular, the AI algorithms utilize machine learning and predictive analytics which may lead to flawed, biased, and inaccurate results, which could lead to ineffective product or target candidates and exposure to competitive and reputational harm. We face increased competition from other companies that are using AI and related methods for drug discovery, some of which have more resources than we do and may have developed more effective methods than we and any third-party collaborators have, which may reduce our and any third-party collaborator’s effectiveness in identifying potential targets and attracting additional collaborators to work with us. Even with the successful implementation of AI, we may fail to correctly identify indications and allocate resources efficiently, which could adversely impact our pipeline and ability to compete effectively.

Current wording

The industry in which we compete is characterized by rapid technological advancements, frequent introductions of new products and heavy competition. The discovery of new products and targets remains vital to our success and the implementation by us and by any third-party collaborators of AI technologies and processes, including advanced predictive analytics, computational approaches for drug discovery and so-called “generative” AI, has the potential to provide significant benefits in these areas. Use of AI in our efforts may be difficult to deploy successfully due to operational issues inherent in such methods. In particular, the AI algorithms utilize machine learning and predictive analytics which may lead to flawed, biased, and inaccurate results, which could lead to ineffective product or target candidates and exposure to competitive and reputational harm. We face increased competition from other companies that are using AI and related methods for drug discovery, some of which have more resources than we do and may have developed more effective methods than we and any third-party collaborators have, which may reduce our and any third-party collaborator’s effectiveness in identifying potential targets and attracting additional collaborators to work with us. Even with the successful implementation of AI, we may fail to correctly identify indications and allocate resources efficiently, which could adversely impact our pipeline and ability to compete effectively.

Previous wording

Market acceptance and sales of any product candidates that we commercialize, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these drugs and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed care organizations and other private health insurers. Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Commercial payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any product candidates that we develop will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. One third-party payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug does not assure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement, for the drug. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a therapy does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Each third-party payor determines whether or not it will provide coverage for a therapy, what amount it will pay the manufacturer for the therapy, and on what tier of its formulary it will be placed. The position on a third-party payor’s list of covered drugs, or formulary, generally determines the co-payment that a patient will need to make to obtain the therapy and can strongly influence the adoption of such therapy by patients and physicians. Patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers prescribing such services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Patients are unlikely to use our drugs unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our drugs.

Current wording

Market acceptance and sales of any product candidates that we commercialize, if approved, will depend in part on the extent to which coverage and adequate reimbursement for these drugs and related treatments will be available from third-party payors, including government health administration authorities, managed care organizations and other private health insurers. Third-party payors decide which therapies they will pay for and establish reimbursement levels. Commercial payors often rely upon Medicare coverage policy and payment limitations in setting their own coverage and reimbursement policies. However, decisions regarding the extent of coverage and amount of reimbursement to be provided for any product candidates that we develop will be made on a payor-by-payor basis. One third-party payor’s determination to provide coverage for a drug does not ensure that other payors will also provide coverage, and adequate reimbursement, for the drug. Additionally, a third-party payor’s decision to provide coverage for a therapy does not imply that an adequate reimbursement rate will be approved. Each third-party payor determines whether or not it will provide coverage for a therapy, what amount it will pay the manufacturer for the therapy, and on what tier of its formulary it will be placed. The position on a third-party payor’s list of covered drugs, or formulary, generally determines the co-payment that a patient will need to make to obtain the therapy and can strongly influence the adoption of such therapy by patients and physicians. Patients who are prescribed treatments for their conditions and providers prescribing such services generally rely on third-party payors to reimburse all or part of the associated healthcare costs. Patients are unlikely to use our drugs unless coverage is provided and reimbursement is adequate to cover a significant portion of the cost of our drugs.

Previous wording

We are aware of GLP-1R small molecules in development by Eli Lilly, Qilu Regor Therapeutics, AstraZeneca/Eccogene, Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine, Huadong, Sciwind Biosciences, Ascletis, Gilead, Kallyope, MindRank, vTv Therapeutics, Corxel, Carmot Therapeutics (acquired by Roche Group in January 2024) and Kailera Therapeutics, formerly Hercules CM Newco (licensed HRS-7535, an oral small molecule GLP-1; HRS-9531 a GLP-1/GIP; and preclinical asset HRS-4729 from Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine). We have granted Genentech, Inc. and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd (collectively “GNE”) a non-exclusive license to and covenant that we will not assert certain of our patents with respect to the exploitation of CT-996, a GLP-1R small molecule being developed by GNE following its acquisition of Carmot Therapeutics. We will not be able to utilize these patent rights to prevent the commercialization of this competitive molecule if it is successfully developed but we will be eligible for royalties on its sale in patented countries. There are currently approved GLP-1R agonists for the treatment of diabetes and obesity marketed by Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Sanofi. We are also aware of other GLP-1R plus dual/tri incretin targeting peptides in development by Eli Lilly, Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group, Boehringer Ingelheim, Altimmune, Carmot Therapeutics, Sciwind Biosciences, Novo Nordisk, Viking Therapeutics, Amgen, Merck, Zealand Pharma, D&D Pharmatech, GMAX Biopharma, Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine, BrightGene, Innovent Biologics, PegBio, MetaVia Therapeutics, Hanmi Pharmaceuticals, ProGen Co., Pep2Tango, Metsera (acquired by Pfizer in November 2025), QL Biopharma, Lexaria Bioscience, Sun Pharmaceutical, Gan & Lee, Innogen, Biomed Industries, Verdiva Bio and Ascletis. Despite significant biopharmaceutical industry investment, no oral small molecule therapy targeting amylin has been approved for the treatment of diabetes or obesity. We are aware of amylin small molecules in preclinical development by: Eli Lilly, Eccogene, Nxera, Iktos/Cube Biotech strategic collaboration, Alveus Therapeutics, Ascletis, Laekna, Corxel and Ambrosia Biosciences. Additionally, we are aware of APJ receptor targeted product candidates in development for COVID 19 acute respiratory distress syndrome by CohBar, Inc.; IPF, systemic sclerosis interstitial lung disease, and kidney nephrotic syndrome by Apie Therapeutics; obesity by Laekna, Prospect Therapeutics, BioAge Labs; and muscle atrophy by BioAge Labs, Inc. Both Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb (“BMS”) have APJ receptor targeted product candidates for heart failure. Furthermore, we are aware of LPA1R targeted product candidates in development for IPF by BMS, Horizon Therapeutics (acquired by Amgen in October 2023) and DJS Antibodies; and myelin restoration and neuroinflammation by Contineum Therapeutics.

Current wording

We are aware of GLP-1R small molecules in development by Eli Lilly, Qilu Regor Therapeutics, AstraZeneca/Eccogene, Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine, Huadong, Sciwind Biosciences, Ascletis, Gilead, Kallyope, MindRank, vTv Therapeutics, Corxel, Merck, Pfizer, Carmot Therapeutics (acquired by Roche Group in January 2024) and Kailera Therapeutics, formerly Hercules CM Newco (licensed HRS-7535, an oral small molecule GLP-1; HRS-9531 a GLP-1/GIP; and preclinical asset HRS-4729, a GLP-1/GIP/GCG from Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine). We have granted Genentech, Inc. and F. Hoffmann-La Roche Ltd (collectively “GNE”) a non-exclusive license to and covenant that we will not assert certain of our patents with respect to the exploitation of CT-996, a GLP-1R small molecule being developed by GNE following its acquisition of Carmot Therapeutics. We will not be able to utilize these patent rights to prevent the commercialization of this competitive molecule if it is successfully developed but we will be eligible for royalties on its sale in patented countries. There are currently approved GLP-1R agonists for the treatment of diabetes and obesity marketed by Novo Nordisk, Eli Lilly, AstraZeneca and Sanofi. We are also aware of other GLP-1R plus dual/tri incretin targeting peptides in development by Eli Lilly, Jiangsu Hansoh Pharmaceutical Group, Boehringer Ingelheim, Altimmune, Carmot Therapeutics, Sciwind Biosciences, Novo Nordisk, Viking Therapeutics, Amgen, Merck, Zealand Pharma, D&D Pharmatech, GMAX Biopharma, Jiangsu Hengrui Medicine, BrightGene, Innovent Biologics, PegBio, MetaVia Therapeutics, Hanmi Pharmaceuticals, ProGen Co., Pep2Tango, Metsera (acquired by Pfizer in November 2025), QL Biopharma, Lexaria Bioscience, Sun Pharmaceutical, Gan & Lee, Innogen, Biomed Industries, Verdiva Bio and Ascletis. Despite significant biopharmaceutical industry investment, no oral small molecule therapy targeting amylin has been approved for the treatment of diabetes or obesity. We are aware of amylin small molecules in preclinical development by: Eli Lilly, Eccogene, Nxera, Iktos/Cube Biotech strategic collaboration, Alveus Therapeutics, Ascletis, Laekna, Corxel and Ambrosia Biosciences. Additionally, we are aware of APJ receptor targeted product candidates in development for COVID 19 acute respiratory distress syndrome by CohBar, Inc.; IPF, systemic sclerosis interstitial lung disease, and kidney nephrotic syndrome by Apie Therapeutics; obesity by Laekna, Prospect Therapeutics, BioAge Labs; and muscle atrophy by BioAge Labs, Inc. Both Amgen and Bristol Myers Squibb (“BMS”) have APJ receptor targeted product candidates for heart failure. Furthermore, we are aware of LPA1R targeted product candidates in development for IPF by BMS, Horizon Therapeutics (acquired by Amgen in October 2023) and DJS Antibodies; and myelin restoration and neuroinflammation by Contineum Therapeutics.

Previous wording

In addition, current Australian tax regulations provide for a refundable research and development tax credit equal to 43.5% of qualified expenditures. Although we have previously claimed a refundable research and development tax credit there is a possibility that we may not be able to claim such credit or we might qualify for a lesser credit. If we lose our ability to operate Annapurna AU or Gasherbrum AU in Australia, or if in the future we are ineligible or unable to receive the research and development tax credit or are required to refund any research and development tax credit previously received or have to reserve for such credit in our financial statements, or if the Australian government significantly reduces or eliminates the tax credit, our business and results of operation may be adversely affected.

Current wording

In addition, current Australian tax regulations provide for a refundable research and development tax credit equal to 43.5% of qualified expenditures. Although we have previously claimed a refundable research and development tax credit, there is a possibility that we may not be able to claim such credit or we might qualify for a lesser credit. If we lose our ability to operate Annapurna AU or Gasherbrum AU in Australia, or if in the future we are ineligible or unable to receive the research and development tax credit or are required to refund any research and development tax credit previously received or have to reserve for such credit in our financial statements, or if the Australian government significantly reduces or eliminates the tax credit, our business and results of operations may be adversely affected.

Previous wording

The Cayman Islands Data Protection Act imposes obligations on data controllers in relation to the processing of personal data, and also introduced rights for data subjects (which may be subject to various exemptions), including, among others: (a) personal data must be processed fairly and on the basis of one of the grounds for processing as set out in the Data Protection Act; (b) personal data must be obtained for a specified lawful purpose; (c) personal data must be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose for which it was processed; (d) personal data must be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date; (e) personal data must not be kept for longer than is necessary; (f) personal data must be processed in accordance with the rights of the data subject; (g) appropriate technical and organizational security measures must be taken to prevent unauthorized or unlawful processing, accidental loss or destruction of personal data; and (h) the personal data may not be transferred to a country unless that country ensures an adequate level of protection for the rights and freedoms of data subjects.

Current wording

The Data Protection Act (As Revised) of the Cayman Islands (“Data Protection Act”) imposes obligations on data controllers in relation to the processing of personal data, and also introduced rights for data subjects (which may be subject to various exemptions), including, among others: (a) personal data must be processed fairly and on the basis of one of the grounds for processing as set out in the Data Protection Act; (b) personal data must be obtained for a specified lawful purpose; (c) personal data must be adequate, relevant and not excessive in relation to the purpose for which it was processed; (d) personal data must be accurate and, where necessary, kept up to date; (e) personal data must not be kept for longer than is necessary; (f) personal data must be processed in accordance with the rights of the data subject; (g) appropriate technical and organizational security measures must be taken to prevent unauthorized or unlawful processing, accidental loss or destruction of personal data; and (h) the personal data may not be transferred to a country unless that country ensures an adequate level of protection for the rights and freedoms of data subjects.

Previous wording

Due to our operations in China, our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects may be influenced to a certain degree by economic, political, legal and social conditions in China or changes in government relations between China and the United States or other governments. The Chinese government may intervene in or influence our operations, which could result in a change in our operations and impact the value of our ADSs. Any economic downturn, whether actual or perceived, further decrease in economic growth rates or an otherwise uncertain economic outlook could affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as the market price of our ADSs. In addition, the global macroeconomic environment is facing challenges. It is unclear whether these challenges and uncertainties will be contained or resolved, and what effects they may have on the global political and economic conditions, and our business operations in the long term. There is significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and China with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs. The Chinese government has implemented various measures to encourage economic development and guide the allocation of resources. Some of these measures may benefit the overall Chinese economy, but may have a negative effect on us. Due to our operations in China, any future Chinese, U.S. or other rules and regulations that place restrictions on capital raising or other activities by companies with operations in China could affect our business and results of operations. If the business environment in China deteriorates from the perspective of domestic or international investment, or if relations between China and the United States or other governments deteriorate and geopolitical tensions between China and the United States increase, our business in China and United States, as well as the market price of our ADSs, may also be affected.

Current wording

Due to our operations in China, our business, results of operations, financial condition and prospects may be influenced to a certain degree by economic, political, legal and social conditions in China or changes in government relations between China and the United States or other governments. The Chinese government may intervene in or influence our operations, which could result in a change in our operations and impact the value of our ADSs. Any economic downturn, whether actual or perceived, further decrease in economic growth rates or an otherwise uncertain economic outlook could affect our business, financial condition and results of operations, as well as the market price of our ADSs. In addition, the global macroeconomic environment is facing challenges. It is unclear whether these challenges and uncertainties will be contained or resolved, and what effects they may have on the global political and economic conditions, and our business operations in the long term. There is significant uncertainty about the future relationship between the United States and China with respect to trade policies, treaties, government regulations and tariffs. The Chinese government has implemented various measures to encourage economic development and guide the allocation of resources. Some of these measures may benefit the overall Chinese economy, but may have a negative effect on us. Due to our operations in China, any future Chinese, U.S. or other rules and regulations that place restrictions on capital raising or other activities by companies with operations in China could affect our business and results of operations. If the business environment in China deteriorates from the perspective of domestic or international investment, or if relations between China and the United States or other governments deteriorate and geopolitical tensions between China and the United States increase, our business in China and the United States, as well as the market price of our ADSs, may also be affected.

Previous wording

Additionally, China’s Cyber Security Law, promulgated by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (“SCNPC”) in November 2016 which came into effect in June 2017 and was amended in October 2025, and the Administrative Measures for the Hierarchical Protection of Information Security promulgated by the Ministry of Public Security, National Administration of State Secrets Protection, State Cryptography Administration and other government authority in June 2007, requires companies to take certain organizational, technical and administrative measures and other necessary measures to ensure the security of their networks and data stored on their networks. Specifically, the Cyber Security Law and the Administrative Measures for the Hierarchical Protection of Information Security provides that China adopt a multi-level protection scheme (“MLPS”), under which network operators are required to perform obligations of security protection to ensure that the network is free from interference, disruption or unauthorized access, and prevent network data from being disclosed, stolen or tampered. Under the MLPS, entities operating information systems must have a thorough assessment of the risks and the conditions of their information and

Current wording

Additionally, China’s Cyber Security Law, promulgated by the Standing Committee of the National People’s Congress (“SCNPC”) in November 2016 which came into effect in June 2017 and was amended in October 2025, and the Administrative Measures for the Hierarchical Protection of Information Security promulgated by the Ministry of Public Security, National Administration of State Secrets Protection, State Cryptography Administration and other government authority in June 2007, require companies to take certain organizational, technical and administrative measures and other necessary measures to ensure the security of their networks and data stored on their networks. Specifically, the Cyber Security Law and the Administrative Measures for the Hierarchical Protection of Information Security provide that China adopt a multi-level protection scheme (“MLPS”), under which network operators are required to perform obligations of security protection to ensure that the network is free from interference, disruption or unauthorized access, and prevent network data from being disclosed, stolen or tampered. Under the MLPS, entities operating information systems must have a thorough assessment of the risks and the conditions of their information and

Previous wording

In addition, certain industry-specific laws and regulations affect the collection and transfer of data in the PRC. The Regulations on the Administration of Human Genetic Resources of the PRC (the “HGR Regulation”) was promulgated by the State Council in May 2019 and came into effect in July 2019, and was further revised in May 2024. It stipulates that foreign organizations, individuals, and the entities established or actually controlled by foreign organizations or individuals are forbidden to collect, preserve and export China’s human genetic resources. Foreign organizations and the entities established or actually controlled by foreign organizations or individuals may only utilize and be provided with China’s human genetic resources after satisfaction of all requirements under the HGR Regulation and other applicable laws, such as (i) China’s human genetic resources being utilized only in international cooperation with Chinese scientific research institutions, universities, medical institutions, and enterprises for scientific research and clinical trials after completion of requisite approval or filing formalities with competent governmental authorities, and (ii) China’s human genetic resources information being provided after required filing and information backup procedures have been gone through. In October 2020, the SCNPC promulgated the Biosecurity Law of the PRC, which came into effect in April 2021 and was further revised in April 2024. The Biosecurity Law of the PRC reaffirms the regulatory requirements stipulated by the HGR Regulation while potentially increasing the administrative sanctions where China’s human genetic resources are collected, preserved, exported or used in international cooperation in violation of applicable laws. In May 2023, the Ministry of Science and Technology published the Implementing Rules for the Regulations on the Administration of Human Genetic Resources (the “HGR Implementing Rules”) which came into effect in July 2023. The HGR Implementing Rules have, among other things, further clarified the scope of China’s human genetic resources information, improved the procedure rules for applicable approval, filing and security review, and refined the provisions with respect to the forbiddance on the collection, preservation and export of China’s human genetic resources by foreign organizations, individuals, and the entities established or actually controlled by foreign organizations or individuals. There remain significant uncertainties as to how various provisions of the HGR Regulation and the related laws and regulations may be interpreted and implemented. Given such uncertainty, although we have made great efforts to comply with mandatory requirements of laws and government authorities in this regard, we cannot assure you that we will be deemed at all times in full compliance with the HGR Regulation, the Biosecurity Law of the PRC, the HGR Implementing Rules and other applicable laws in our utilizing of and deal…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

In addition, certain industry-specific laws and regulations affect the collection and transfer of data in the PRC. The Regulations on the Administration of Human Genetic Resources of the PRC (the “HGR Regulation”) was promulgated by the State Council in May 2019 and came into effect in July 2019, and was further revised in May 2024. It stipulates that foreign organizations, individuals, and the entities established or actually controlled by foreign organizations or individuals are forbidden to collect, preserve and export China’s human genetic resources. Foreign organizations and the entities established or actually controlled by foreign organizations or individuals may only utilize and be provided with China’s human genetic resources after satisfaction of all requirements under the HGR Regulation and other applicable laws, such as (i) China’s human genetic resources being utilized only in international cooperation with Chinese scientific research institutions, universities, medical institutions, and enterprises for scientific research and clinical trials after completion of requisite approval or filing formalities with competent governmental authorities, and (ii) China’s human genetic resources information being provided after required filing and information backup procedures have been completed. In October 2020, the SCNPC promulgated the Biosecurity Law of the PRC, which came into effect in April 2021 and was further revised in April 2024. The Biosecurity Law of the PRC reaffirms the regulatory requirements stipulated by the HGR Regulation while potentially increasing the administrative sanctions where China’s human genetic resources are collected, preserved, exported or used in international cooperation in violation of applicable laws. In May 2023, the Ministry of Science and Technology published the Implementing Rules for the Regulations on the Administration of Human Genetic Resources (the “HGR Implementing Rules”) which came into effect in July 2023. The HGR Implementing Rules have, among other things, further clarified the scope of China’s human genetic resources information, improved the procedure rules for applicable approval, filing and security review, and refined the provisions with respect to the forbiddance on the collection, preservation and export of China’s human genetic resources by foreign organizations, individuals, and the entities established or actually controlled by foreign organizations or individuals. There remain significant uncertainties as to how various provisions of the HGR Regulation and the related laws and regulations may be interpreted and implemented. Given such uncertainty, although we have made great efforts to comply with mandatory requirements of laws and government authorities in this regard, we cannot assure you that we will be deemed at all times in full compliance with the HGR Regulation, the Biosecurity Law of the PRC, the HGR Implementing Rules and other applicable laws in our utilizing of and dealing…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of our new product candidates such as aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, LTSE-2578, ACCG-3535 and any of our future product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. We expect to seek extensions of patent terms in the United States and, if available, in other countries where we are prosecuting patents. In the United States, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent, which is limited to the approved indication (or any additional indications approved during the period of extension) as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. Only one patent per approved product can be extended, the extension cannot extend the total patent term beyond 14 years from approval and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Further, the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for the applicable product candidate will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product candidates earlier than might otherwise be the case.

Current wording

Given the amount of time required for the development, testing and regulatory review of our new product candidates such as aleniglipron, ACCG-2671, ACCG-3535, LTSE-2578 and any of our future product candidates, patents protecting such candidates might expire before or shortly after such candidates are commercialized. We expect to seek extensions of patent terms in the United States and, if available, in other countries where we are prosecuting patents. In the United States, the Drug Price Competition and Patent Term Restoration Act of 1984 permits a patent term extension of up to five years beyond the normal expiration of the patent, which is limited to the approved indication (or any additional indications approved during the period of extension) as compensation for effective patent term lost during product development and FDA regulatory review process. However, we may not receive an extension if we fail to exercise due diligence during the testing phase or regulatory review process, fail to apply within applicable deadlines, fail to apply prior to expiration of relevant patents or otherwise fail to satisfy applicable requirements. Moreover, the length of the extension could be less than we request. Only one patent per approved product can be extended, the extension cannot extend the total patent term beyond 14 years from approval and only those claims covering the approved drug, a method for using it or a method for manufacturing it may be extended. Further, the applicable authorities, including the FDA and the USPTO in the United States, and any equivalent regulatory authority in other countries, may not agree with our assessment of whether such extensions are available, and may refuse to grant extensions to our patents, or may grant more limited extensions than we request. If we are unable to obtain patent term extension or the term of any such extension is less than we request, the period during which we can enforce our patent rights for the applicable product candidate will be shortened and our competitors may obtain approval to market competing products sooner. As a result, our revenue from applicable products could be reduced. Further, if this occurs, our competitors may be able to take advantage of our investment in development and clinical trials by referencing our clinical and preclinical data and launch their product candidates earlier than might otherwise be the case.

Previous wording

Our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop may infringe existing or future patents owned by third parties. We may in the future become party to, or be threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current and any future product candidates and technologies, including interference or derivation, PGR and IPR proceedings before the USPTO. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. There is a risk that third parties may choose to engage in litigation with us to enforce or to otherwise assert their patent rights against us. Even if we believe such

Current wording

Our product candidates and other proprietary technologies we may develop may infringe existing or future patents owned by third parties. We may in the future become party to, or be threatened with, adversarial proceedings or litigation regarding intellectual property rights with respect to our current and any future product candidates and technologies, including interference or derivation, PGR and IPR proceedings before the USPTO. Third parties may assert infringement claims against us based on existing patents or patents that may be granted in the future, regardless of their merit. There is a risk that third parties may choose to engage in litigation with us to enforce or to otherwise assert their patent rights against us. Even if we believe such claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could have a negative impact on our ability to commercialize our current and

Previous wording

claims are without merit, a court of competent jurisdiction could hold that these third-party patents are valid, enforceable and infringed, which could have a negative impact on our ability to commercialize our current and any future product candidates. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, a court of competent jurisdiction may not invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. If we are found to infringe a third party’s valid and enforceable intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing, manufacturing and marketing our product candidate(s) and technologies. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing and commercializing the infringing technologies or product candidate, or redesign our product candidates or processes so they do not infringe, which may not be possible or may require substantial monetary expenditures and time. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent or other intellectual property right. A finding of infringement could prevent us from manufacturing and commercializing our current or any future product candidates or force us to cease some or all of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Current wording

any future product candidates. In order to successfully challenge the validity of any such U.S. patent in federal court, we would need to overcome a presumption of validity. As this burden is a high one requiring us to present clear and convincing evidence as to the invalidity of any such U.S. patent claim, a court of competent jurisdiction may not invalidate the claims of any such U.S. patent. If we are found to infringe a third party’s valid and enforceable intellectual property rights, we could be required to obtain a license from such third party to continue developing, manufacturing and marketing our product candidate(s) and technologies. However, we may not be able to obtain any required license on commercially reasonable terms or at all. Even if we were able to obtain a license, it could be non-exclusive, thereby giving our competitors and other third parties access to the same technologies licensed to us, and it could require us to make substantial licensing and royalty payments. We could be forced, including by court order, to cease developing, manufacturing and commercializing the infringing technologies or product candidate, or redesign our product candidates or processes so they do not infringe, which may not be possible or may require substantial monetary expenditures and time. In addition, we could be found liable for monetary damages, including treble damages and attorneys’ fees, if we are found to have willfully infringed a patent or other intellectual property right. A finding of infringement could prevent us from manufacturing and commercializing our current or any future product candidates or force us to cease some or all of our business operations, which could materially harm our business. Claims that we have misappropriated the confidential information or trade secrets of third parties could have a similar negative impact on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Previous wording

Competitors or other third parties may infringe or otherwise violate our patents, trademarks or other intellectual property. To counter infringement or unauthorized use, we may be required to file infringement claims, which can be expensive and time consuming and divert the time and attention of our management and scientific personnel. Our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technologies claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or insufficient written description. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or patent offices in foreign countries or made a misleading statement during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar validity claims before the USPTO in post-grant proceedings such as ex parte reexaminations, IPR, or PGR, or oppositions or similar proceedings outside the United States, in parallel with litigation or even outside the context of litigation. For example, in July 2026, Kailera Therapeutics, Inc. initiated a proceeding before the European Patent Office challenging the validity of a European patent held by our wholly owned subsidiary, Gasherbrum Bio Inc., and filed an application in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California seeking discovery from us in support of that European proceeding. The timing and outcome of these proceedings are unpredictable. Although the European patent covers a class of oral GLP-1 receptor agonists that is different from aleniglipron and any other compound in clinical development by us, an adverse determination in any such proceedings may result in our patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar technologies and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technologies. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. There may be invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. There may be double patenting among our own patents, which the patent examiner(s) fail to raise during prosecution. For the patents and patent applications that we have licensed, we may have limited or no right to participate in the d…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Current wording

and scientific personnel. Our pending patent applications cannot be enforced against third parties practicing the technologies claimed in such applications unless and until a patent issues from such applications. Any claims we assert against perceived infringers could provoke these parties to assert counterclaims against us alleging that we infringe their patents, in addition to counterclaims asserting that our patents are invalid or unenforceable, or both. In patent litigation in the United States, defendant counterclaims alleging invalidity and/or unenforceability are commonplace. Grounds for a validity challenge could be an alleged failure to meet any of several statutory requirements, including lack of novelty, obviousness, non-enablement or insufficient written description. Grounds for an unenforceability assertion could be an allegation that someone connected with prosecution of the patent withheld relevant information from the USPTO or patent offices in foreign countries or made a misleading statement during prosecution. Third parties may also raise similar validity claims before the USPTO in post-grant proceedings such as ex parte reexaminations, IPR, or PGR, or oppositions or similar proceedings outside the United States, in parallel with litigation or even outside the context of litigation. For example, in July 2026, Kailera Therapeutics, Inc. initiated a proceeding before the European Patent Office challenging the validity of a European patent held by our wholly owned subsidiary, Gasherbrum Bio Inc., and filed an application in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California seeking discovery from us in support of that European proceeding. The timing and outcome of these proceedings are unpredictable. Although the European patent covers a class of oral GLP-1 receptor agonists that is different from aleniglipron and any other compound in clinical development by us, an adverse determination in any such proceedings may result in our patent claims being narrowed, invalidated, or held unenforceable, in whole or in part, which could limit our ability to stop others from using or commercializing similar technologies and products, or limit the duration of the patent protection of our technologies. The outcome following legal assertions of invalidity and unenforceability is unpredictable. There may be invalidating prior art, of which we and the patent examiner were unaware during prosecution. There may be double patenting among our own patents, which the patent examiner(s) fail to raise during prosecution. For the patents and patent applications that we have licensed, we may have limited or no right to participate in the defense of any licensed patents against challenge by a third party. If a defendant were to prevail on a legal assertion of invalidity or unenforceability, we would lose at least part, and perhaps all, of any future patent protection on our current or future product candidates. Such a loss of patent protection co…

Excerpt shortened here; the source contains the full paragraph.

Previous wording

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other foreign countries could increase uncertainties and costs, and may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain, and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”) was signed into law. When implemented, the Leahy-Smith Act included several significant changes to U.S. patent law that impacted how patent rights could be prosecuted, enforced and defended. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents.

Current wording

Changes in either the patent laws or interpretation of the patent laws in the United States and other foreign countries could increase uncertainties and costs, and may diminish our ability to protect our inventions, obtain, maintain, and enforce our intellectual property rights and, more generally, could affect the value of our patents or narrow the scope of our patent protection. On September 16, 2011, the Leahy-Smith America Invents Act (the “Leahy-Smith Act”) was signed into law. When implemented, the Leahy-Smith Act included several significant changes to U.S. patent law that impacted how patent rights could be prosecuted, enforced and defended. These include provisions that affect the way patent applications are prosecuted, redefine prior art and provide more efficient and cost-effective avenues for competitors to challenge the validity of patents. These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including PGR, IPR, and derivation proceedings. Further, because of a lower evidentiary standard in these USPTO post-grant proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a patent claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the patent claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party

Previous wording

These include allowing third-party submission of prior art to the USPTO during patent prosecution and additional procedures to attack the validity of a patent by USPTO administered post-grant proceedings, including PGR, IPR, and derivation proceedings. Further, because of a lower evidentiary standard in these USPTO post-grant proceedings compared to the evidentiary standard in United States federal courts necessary to invalidate a patent claim, a third party could potentially provide evidence in a USPTO proceeding sufficient for the USPTO to hold a patent claim invalid even though the same evidence would be insufficient to invalidate the patent claim if first presented in a district court action. Accordingly, a third party may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.

Current wording

may attempt to use the USPTO procedures to invalidate our patent claims that would not have been invalidated if first challenged by the third party as a defendant in a district court action. Thus, the Leahy-Smith Act and its implementation could increase the uncertainties and costs surrounding the prosecution of our patent applications and the enforcement or defense of our issued patents, all of which could have a material adverse effect on our business, financial condition, results of operations and prospects.